How ordinary people become extraordinary

Flickr user Beverly & Pack

(MoneyWatch) COMMENTARY If I hear just one more media pinhead demonize corporate America or another lifetime politician talk about what it takes to run a small business like he has a clue, I'm going to go ballistic.

These days it's popular to complain about CEOs having all this wealth and power, how the "1 percent" has all the advantages, it's not what you know but who you know, the rich keep getting richer and all that.

You'd think CEOs were born with the title, like royalty, or just fell right out of the sky into a cushy corner office chair. The same goes for big successful companies these executives run. They didn't start out that way. 

So before I blow a gasket, I'm going to try to explain how this really works to all the know-it-alls who actually have no idea what they're talking about and yet somehow always seem to have the loudest voices. I'm going to explain how ordinary people and businesses become extraordinary.

And you know what? I'm going to explain it in a way that everyone can understand.

10 characteristics of highly successful people
You won't achieve the American Dream by dreaming
Unusual origins of 15 innovative companies

There's a great movie with Tim Allen and Sigourney Weaver called "Galaxy Quest" in which a bunch of washed-up actors from a cult space TV show -- a Star Trek knockoff -- somehow end up in the middle of a real-life interstellar battle to save an alien race from genocide.

With the aliens' and their own lives at stake, the bungling, terrified actors somehow find the courage to step up to the plate and live up to their show's heroic motto: "Never give up, never surrender." In the end they save the alien race from extinction and rid the universe of a bad guy who ranks right up there with Darth Vader.

Let me tell you something. Climbing the corporate ladder and building a successful business in the real world can be exactly like that. It takes tremendous courage, resourcefulness and perseverance in the face of brutal competition and adversity that often seem impossible to overcome.

That's why the movie resonated with me like it did. There were definitely times over the past 30 years when I felt like those actors. Times when my relatively small team and company, underfunded and under-resourced, went up against gigantic, scary companies like Microsoft (MSFT) and Intel (INTC).

There were times when I wasn't at all sure I was up to the challenge. There were times when I felt hopeless, even washed up. But I never gave up and I never surrendered. And every successful corporate executive and business leader goes through the exact same thing for years and years. Entire companies, too.

When you denigrate Big Oil, Big Pharma or Big Telecom, you're missing the simple fact that big companies are nothing but small companies that became really successful through decades of remarkable effort. And they're all led by people who worked their tails off to overcome extraordinary challenges and hardships. People just like you.

Exxon Mobil (XOM) CEO Rex Tillerson grew up in a small town in Texas, got a degree in civil engineering and started out as an entry-level engineer at the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, which had just changed it's name to Exxon. As the company grew, Tillerson climbed the ladder, finally becoming chief executive 31 years later.

Former Verizon (VZ) CEO Ivan Seidenberg began his career as a cable splicer's assistant right out of high school. Decades later he became head of NYNEX, a Regional Bell Operating Company, and through subsequent mergers with Bell Atlantic and GTE became CEO of newly formed Verizon in 2000.

AT&T (T) CEO Randall Stephenson joined the Oklahoma information technology department of Southwestern Bell right out of school in 1982. His predecessor, Ed Whitacre Jr., started out as a facility engineer, also at Southwestern Bell. He worked his way up to CEO, acquired one company after another, and eventually grew a "Baby Bell" into today's AT&T.

There's a common mantra these days that corporations are not people. Yes, they are. Starbucks (SBUX) founder and CEO Howard Schultz grew up not far from where I did in Brooklyn, New York. Steve Ballmer, the often-demonized chief executive of Microsoft, grew up In Detroit. His father worked for Ford (F).

A good friend of mine, a former CEO, just bought a beautiful estate in one of the nicest parts of Silicon Valley. He has all sorts of fancy cars. But he didn't start that way. He worked for decades, first at a research lab, then as an entrepreneur at a few startups until one finally took off and went public.

All these people are just like you and me. They all came from working families. And their companies were no different from any small or midsize business. The only difference is that they and the employees of their companies worked tirelessly, faced extreme adversity, overcame the  obstacles and made it. They never gave up and never surrendered.

That's how ordinary people and companies beat the odds and became extraordinary.

Image courtesy of Flickr user Beverly & Pack

[Mr.Non-Zero]

I think in some ways this article makes sense in terms of the sacrifices one goes through to beocme successful. Whats missing is that many other Americans go through many of the same challanges, yet they do not yield the results that other do. The dynamic between different sets of people and whether or not they rise to the ranks of C level execs has been documented. At the end of the day, we say we are in a country where equal opportunity exists, but it never seems to shake out that way in terms of results.

Whilst Iunderstand that people that rise the ranks of a corporation, becom successful in their own business or find themselves living their dreams should be thankful for all they have accomplished and live in gratitude. Whose to say a person working their tail of in a job they love with no interest in climbing to the highest ranks should be treated differently than someone that chose to climb the corp levels to the top. I think thats the issue at hand. Everyone sees success in different lights. Some are happy not climbing to the top, but sacrifice and work just as hard as those that climb to that escalon. The question is why is someone that chooses not to climb to the top be treated differently than those that made that choice? There may also have been life circumstances that changed ones plans.

I am a white male, going for a graduate degree and came from nothing. The fact that I have become successful and would like to rise to the highest ranks of an organization dont mean I feel like I should be treated than anyone else. I am just grateful for all the opportunities that I have had and will have. That gratitude makes me want to give back to those that may need help with more opportunities, or other ways to help others live their dreams. I dont expect anyone else to want to follow my path as it is mine. So punishing those that dont see things the way I do sounds like a joke of sorts.

[dcalbrecht]

Relative to what RCC wrote, "None of these CEO's created their success on their own. Each went to school, each one relies on government programs to reach their success. Oil Companies rely on roads, cars, etc. etc. Phone companies need public airwaves, so rely on government programs, Software companies rely on people building hardware, transportation, roads, mail service, etc. To say they did it themselves is the height of hubris. It takes hard work, but it also takes lots of help from lots of different sources. There is no "I Built That", there is only "I Built That with the Help of Many People"

Each society builds on the successes, and failures, of the population before it. Highways are built by MEN (and WOMEN). The government pays the bills, but does not design or actually lay the blacktop, people do. Wagons and barges lead to trains, which lead to cars and trucks which lead to planes and now the internet. Dirt paths lead to roads which lead to waterways, railroads and highways and interstate super-highways.

The COMPANY was built by the person who started it or ran it, such as the CEO. The founder saw a need or opportunity and took a risk to fill it. The initial and continuing investors take a risk to keep the company going. With great risk can come great reward. We do not reward the person that stays at the bottom of the mountain and admires the top of it. We admire the one that took the risk to put together the team and the leader of the team that reached the top.

The CEO's were taught by teachers, yes, but THEY had to learn, take the tests, get the grades, etc. to get where they are today. That is the productive results of the teachers. But they only facilitate the work. The student has to do it. What is the percentage of students that will go on to great success for a given teacher? Millions to one?

Success is the result of a series of events that resulted from hard work, and yes, sometimes some luck. Many people have worked hard and for no fault of their own, were not in the right place at the right time to see their work turn into success. But without the hard work, the opportunities that came along for some, that they were "lucky" to take advantage of, would not have happened!

The individuals mentioned WORKED their way up to where they are. Each person mentioned started out in a very low position and went from there. If there are government programs in place, they are there to help and INDUSTRY, not just a given company. The government is there to help the PEOPLE, and this includes the companies that employ them and provide the products and services we need.

But keep in mind also that a company first needs to SURVIVE just like you and me. Pushing jobs off shore, although unpleasant, may be necessary to compete with the imports from their competitors. If quality and service are considered to be about the same, people buy on price.

3 out of 4 companies will fail within 5 years. The number that move to large corporations from there, is much less. Success is not a guarantee. We all want to be successful in what we do. If not, you are striving for mediocrity, and we have enough of that, thank you.

Some CEO's and management teams become corrupt. Some leaders become tyrants. Some people become murders. But not ALL do. Corporations are not the problem, human GREED and AVARICE are. Punish those that are in the wrong and change the culture of the entity so that it is honest again. To punish an entire corporation (put it in "jail") because of the corruption of the leadership punishes all who work for it unnecessarily. If the management team was corrupt enough, the Corporation will die because of it (like ENRON). Solve human greed and you'll solve all the other issues. But we as humans have been working on that for at least 10,000 years. Anyone have any new suggestions on that???

I'm with Steve on this one. Stop blaming others for what you don't have and find an HONEST way to get it through hard work!

Good luck to you too!

[boogiedown4u]

Wow, you sound angry. And I guess you're from the nice part of Canarsie Brooklyn. Why would you rant in an article for CBS and not in your own blog?

I'm tired of hearing people rant the same talking points.

Unless you come from a great family, being successful in business takes amazing timing, an excellent product/service/business model, and UNREASONABLE ENDURANCE FOR MOST PEOPLE TO HANDLE.

Personally, I'm fine with what politicians say and have done. I love my country and all the imperfections it has. It doesn't effect the fact that I have to continue to fail forward in my own business.

[feralferal]

Corporations aren't just people, they're super-people.

People who have blood in their veins never live longer than about 100 years, but there's no natural limit on how long a corporate person can live.

Corporations can kill normal people, be found guilty and never get executed. Or steal, get caught and never spend a day in jail.

They never get poisoned by pollution or get cancer from industrial chemicals like normal people.

And rather than having to vote, they can pay to drown out political discourse among blood-based individuals... or just buy politicians.

[dana_s78]

You forgot to mention that corporations write the tax code. Why can millionaires put millions of dollars into an IRA and the average American worker can only put in a few thousand? Why does a CEO get a bonus for helping to run a company into the ground while I get terminated for 'not getting it?'

I don't have a problem with people getting rich, I have a problem when the wealthy are given more advantages than the average American worker.

[rccbliv]

None of these CEO's created their success on their own. Each went to school, each one relies on government programs to reach their success. Oil Companies rely on roads, cars, etc. etc. Phone companies need public airwaves, so rely on government programs, Software companies rely on people building hardware, transportation, roads, mail service, etc. To say they did it themselves is the height of hubris. It takes hard work, but it also takes lots of help from lots of different sources. There is no "I Built That", there is only "I Built That with the Help of Many People"

[CBSWOWEE]

I was awestruck when I read some of these comments. I did not perceive any racism at all, just an opinion of what perhaps a few/one factor might be to getting a small business into the larger success tract where they could gain fame and fortune.

I know, having worked with entrepreneurs, that oft times it is this passion, the never giving up that allowed some folks to make tremendous sacrifices to weather all the storms--sometimes for as long as 10 years before they were "successful."

Today with the multitude of rules, regulations, taxes and reporting requirements, it is surprising to me how many new businesses still survive, some going on to gaining firm footholds in their industry, serving up good products, great customer service/care, being philanthropic, and being named the best places to work (outstanding management, morals and ethics, etc.)

Often times, these companies never reach the level of the companies mentioned, and maybe fortunately so because as one writer says: Notoriety is more a curse than a blessing. Just look at the bile that was generated today for the aforementioned companies!

Perhaps, big corps deserve some of the lesser than generous comments, but I think the article was really written as a generality to show what one of the factors can do to help a small company become a great performer, not so much an article that supports all large or growing corps.

I would agree with other comments also that no matter where or what industry or organization, there are always those few bad apples that turn the barrel into a bucket of worms, and that even when you perform a significant good, there are those who can always turn what you achieve into somehow something wrong.

Write on....let those who take this piece of journalism as encouragement, do so. Let others say what they will. It is interesting to see how differently we look at the world.

[tawster]

Point taken. And, I agree, folks that rise from nothing to something need to be congratulated. Even if they had a little help and luck on the way up (birth, race, gender, etc). And those advantages need to be addressed over time.

But there is a balance... The balance is when BigOil, BigPharma, BigAg, BigFinance *misbehaves*. Once a company begins to misbehave, the patience and understanding go away. I am a small business owner, and I also have lived the corporate life within the world of middle management. There comes a time when a company goes from small to medium to large (I have been a part of all phases) that seems to correlate with ethically grey to black behavior. The Enrons, Exxons, Goldman Sachs and Monsantos of the world abuse their power in the marketplace, and those "great" leaders that run them, as talented as they may be, allow the quest for growth to supercede their morality meter.

What this leads to is mistrust. In an ideal world, large companies would operate with transparency and on a level playing field. But they don't. Small businesses are not immune as anyone that has had to deal with building contractors know. But their abuses are localized and usually take them out in the market. But if they "make it" long enough, or they play fair long enough... they become larger and often end up succeeding in spite of growing abuses and their version of "fair play."

So... successful people need to be congratulated. But when the animal they run becomes a beast, I become very understanding when folks begin to be suspicious of all large animals and those who govern the behaviors of those animals. Envy can be toxic... but leaders need to understand that some of anger comes from folks that are bitten by that beast. And a lot *a lot* of people have been bitten.

[Carolyn_Hansen]

And people get upset with CEOs who believe that those who aren't rich and successful deserve poverty because (clearly) they haven't worked hard enough, because they have (clearly) given up when they should have "never surrendered."

I guess you'd be surprised at how hard some of those 99 percenters have worked -- and still haven't climbed the ladder of success. Please note how all the friends you name in this article are white men. I understand you don't believe white guys are born advantaged . . . but that's the perception here in the 99 percent, and you really did nothing here to dispel that idea.

Possibly because it was written while you were angry, this column makes you sound like a jerk -- and I don't think that's what you were going for.

[stobak2]

Interesting point. I don't think the implication is that hard work will get you there. It's necessary but far, far from sufficient, that's for sure. Thomas Friedman wrote an illuminating op-ed piece in the NY Times 9/8 called New Rules that does an excellent job of explaining what it takes to get a decent job and have a decent life these days. Check it out.

ST

[BlackInnovation]

Very interesting insight from the perspective of a very privileged man who lacks understanding of the struggles for economic inclusion being made by millions of disconnected innovators.

Consider the 1.9 million Black-owned businesses that produced LESS than 1% of the nation's GDP in 2007. More than 1.8 million of those businesses were sole proprietors with zero employees. Then the economy collapsed.

When it comes to access to capital, perhaps it would do well for the author to investigate the hostile terrain traversed by Black entrepreneurs.

Perhaps it would do well to also recognize that America ought not be viewed by default as "White America."

When one considers the generational disadvantages today's generations have to overcome, we can see more clearly the lack of family, friends and proverbial fools that make up the largest segment of funding for startups and entrepreneur-minded individuals.

We can also see the dysfunction of high-poverty schools in which the majority of minority students are channeled. The achievement rates of those schools offer insight into the lack of production into the pipeline of high-wage jobs. When we look at the construct of the private sectors and corporate America, we can see the lack of diversity, the lack of opportunity for diverse workers and the arbitrary ceilings and roadblocks placed in the path of high-achieving minorities. When they succeed despite the roadblocks, arbitrary walls to climb and institutional challenges we hear the nonsensical rhetoric that feeds the ignorant masses who point to outliers and say with a high degree of confidence, "Well, he did it!" The natural inference is there must be something wrong with the rest of us, rather than if we change the ugly hostile system there might be many more examples to which one can readily point.

This commentary is severely misinformed and myopic.

[YankHank]

You are a real insult to black Americans who are successful, smart and promote real "innovation" - and don't just label themselves as such. Until you hold black parents equally responsible for their kids' poor school performance nothing will change. Contrary to what you claim, minority & women owned companies actually get huge advantages for government contracts, even if they are not as qualified. Some colleges & universities only allow minority or women owned businesses to get contracts. I suppose one could make the argument that white males are being discriminated against openly in those situations. The longer people like you use the "race card" as an excuse for poor performance, the longer you will keep minorities down. Is there racism? Sure there is. Just like there is sexism. Creating handicaps for minorities and women instead of expecting them to compete on an equal playing field only perpetuates the myth that they can't. Some people (of all races) will succeed, some will fail. Small business development centers are located all over the country to help all would be entrepreneurs - check one out. Minorities are not only welcome but many of the professional advisors are highly accomplished minorities themselves.

[stobak2]

None of the people cited in the article were "privileged" and neither was I. I grew up in a tiny inner city apartment. My parents never owned a home or anything but a beat-up old Chevy. I put myself through college. I was no "outlier" and neither were the CEOs I referred to or hundreds of others I've come to know personally over the past 30 years. We worked hard, overcame hardship and never complained that anyone else was "privileged." That's why we were successful.

ST

[cedaly68]

I hate to be disagreeable, but, corporations are not people. People are people. Corporations are collections of people working toward, hopefully, common goals. Your comment on denigrating large companies or industries like Big Oil, Big Pharma or Big Telecom are misplaced. Big Oil spilled 4MM barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico - did they not deserve denigration for such an event? Oh yeah, and it killed 11 men on the rig. When Big Pharma puts forward drugs they know will harm people but intentionally do not disclose the effects, do they not deserve denigration? When Big Telecom inserts charges into your bill, mysteriously extends contracts or over-charges your account, have they not earned denigration? Don't be so defensive of Big Corporations, some have earned what they have sewn. They are big boys, they will be alright. Other corporations, e.g. Big Bank, may have need for further regulation or deregulation coupled with anti-trust, or re-regulation (Glass-Steagall). Yes, Big business was once small business; trust me, as the owner of a small business, when I screw up, I am denigrated. I just don't have the luxury of $4 billion in subsidies, a TARP program or federal support for research.

[YankHank]

Don't persecute all big business because of a few unscrupulous ones.