MIT Class of 1961

MIT Class of 1961

Two years ago, my class had our 50^th Class Reunion. It coincided with MIT celebrating its 150^th birthday – quite an affair. Our class had many luminaries, which I used as examples in my talk to MIT students on careers and my observation on why some are successful and some not so. Let me be clear, success is in the eyes of the behold. Many would consider themselves successful if they had a productive career, raised a good family, have many friends and retired peacefully. Shown below is a slide that I prepared on some of my classmates.

The first point I made was that grades or activities were not a good predictor of “success”.  ‘Of course most of us were good students and many went on to get Ph.D.’s but many of above were not in the top of the class. (How do I know because in 1961, our graduating yearbook showed who made Dean’s List or not. John Reed was not even in the yearbook.) I don’t have time to go into everyone on the list but I will tell the story of William (Bill) Lenoir, the Astronaut. He was on the first operational flight of the Space Shuttle Columbia and subsequently became the Associate Administrator of NASA responsible for Space Flights. At one of our reunion, I asked Bill how did he become an Astronaut. Aside from all the tests Bill was interviewed and he told NASA about having a bad automobile accident while driving at 15 years old. NASA asked him on his reactions and whether he blacked out or not. He did not and Bill believed that fact that he did not blacked out enabled him to be accepted by NASA to be space qualified. Thus aside from education (he was a top student and earned a Ph.D. at MIT), etc., Bill became an Astronaut because of his physical characteristics. Sadly Bill passed away shortly after our reunion, ironically from a bicycle accident.

So what is my observation for the factors of success? They are summarized below:

I think they are self-explanatory. Certainly Bill Lenoir’s “unique” physical characteristic enabled him to become an Astronaut.

An example of some one with unique interest and passion was Bernie Goldhirsh, who studied mechanical engineering. I remembered Bernie as a talented engineer but his passion was sailing. So his passion took him to start Sail magazine, which he sold. With that money Bernie then started Inc. magazine, which focused on young startups and entrepreneurship.  There was no competition as Inc grew as it was the only magazine covering this growing area in the 1990’s. Bernie finally sold Inc for $200M in 2000. His success as a publisher is far from being a mechanical engineer.

Jamie Dimon on: The Essential Hallmarks of a Good Leader

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase has been in the news a lot recently because of the loss that JP Morgan suffered in the London Whale trade and in his compensation. He has been the best bank CEO for the past five years as JP Morgan emerged from the Great Recession in a stronger position. He just published an article on leadership on Linkedin, which should be of interest to anyone aspiring to be a leader and for anyone judging whether he is working in the"right" organization or not. This is especially true for Chinese-Americans, who may bear the burden of being stereotyped. You can read his essay at Linkedin. Many of his points echoes what I used to hear from Jack Welch, the former CEO of GE. Few key points, which I find insightful:

"Loyalty, meritocracy and teamwork

While I deeply believe in loyalty, it often is misused. Loyalty should be to the principles for which someone stands and to the institution: Loyalty to an individual frequently is another form of cronyism. Leaders demand a lot from their employees and should be loyal to them – but loyalty and mutual respect are two-way streets. Loyalty to employees does not mean that a manager owes them a particular job. Loyalty to employees means building a healthy, vibrant company; telling them the truth; and giving them meaningful work, training and opportunities. If employees fall down, we should get them the help they need. Meritocracy and teamwork also are critical but frequently misunderstood. Meritocracy means putting the best person in the job, which promotes a sense of justice in the organization rather than the appearance of cynicism: “here they go again, taking care of their friends.” Finally, while teamwork is important and often code for “getting along,” equally important is an individual’s ability to have the courage to stand alone and do the right thing."

If you read carefully, the situation is actually difficult to judge. How do you determine an action is based on merit OR no one taking care of their friends? One answer could be to look at the action of the leader:

"Successful leaders are hard to find

There are examples of individuals who have been thrust, wholly unprepared, into positions of leadership and actually perform well
– I think of President Harry Truman, among others. I would submit, however, that relying on luck is a risky proposition. History shows that bad or inexperienced leaders can produce disastrous results. While there are possibly innate and genetic parts of leadership (perhaps broad intelligence and natural energy), other parts are deeply embedded in the internal values of an individual; for example, work ethic, integrity, knowledge and good judgment. Many leaders have worked their entire lives to get where they are, and while perhaps some achieved their stature through accident or politics, that is not true for most. Anyone on a sports team, in government or in virtually any other endeavor knows when he or she encounters the rare combination of emotional skill, integrity and knowledge that makes a leader."

A questionable example is Obama, who had no demonstrated leadership experience or management track record, except for his ability to inspire the electorate and to organize his followers to win his first Presidential election. Based on my observation at GE I may have some answers and will share them in the future. But it is worthwhile to ponder this question. 

Which is more helpful, Ph. D. or Master degree for industry

This question came in:

This is xxx, a first year graduate student in Materials Sci & Engineering, MIT. I am very glad to hear your talk, and have dinner with you today. You talk is extremely encouraging. I have a few confusions during my MIT study, and hope to hear advices from you. 

From Peking Univ. to MIT, from undergraduate to graduate, the life is very different. When I was an undergraduate student, I could take a lot of courses, but now, as a graduate student, my main task is to do research. Courses and research, which one do you think is more important when you went to the industry? And do you think Ph. D. is much more helpful compared with Master degree, if one wants to go to industry after graduation? 

---------------

The short answer is that of course Ph.D. is more helpful in industry, especially in Material Science if you want to do advanced technical work. And it is essential if you want to go into Academia. On the other hand if you are more interested in practical work or work in product design, then a Master should be sufficient. However, there will be compensation/pay differences.

I think perhaps your question is more than just Ph.D. vs. Master. You may want to think about what is your true interest -- it is research or more practical applications.

Introduction to this Blog

I am Arthur Chen (MIT '61, Ph.D '66) and I recently participated at a panel session on careers at the 2013 MIT Reunion sponsored by the Chinese Student and Scholar Association. It is heartwarming to see that MIT Alumni Association co-sponsored this event. During and after the panel discussion I encountered many questions pertaining to careers and marriages, which stimulated me to start this blog -- so as to share the discussion among all interested parties.

It is my impression that many young students from China do not have familiar access to older Americans, who may provide them with a perspective of American life. Perhaps I can also fill some of that void.

If there are sufficient interest, I will invite my contemporary MIT Chinese-American friends to join this blog so that we can all share our experience and observations with our younger peers. The intent of this blog is to help readers in their career and life development.

My brief Bio is in the panel below. The following are some interesting facts about me.

* I was born in Boston, I spent my childhood in war time China and grew-up in New York City in the 50's -- very few Chinese of my generation then. I was a fly-on-wall during my parents involvement in Chinese politics. My mother was a member of the National Assembly, it elected Chiang Kai-shek as President in 1947.

* I was a Boy Scout leader and camp councilor and American Indian dancing was my hobby. (I even served as an alter boy for a small Old Catholic Church a few weeks in one summer).

* At MIT, my main social activity was associated as a member of the FF Fraternity, the oldest Chinese-American Fraternity founded in 1911. I am still active and the fraternity is going strong.

* In study I was a coop student (intern) with Bell Labs, where I worked on the first modem (128 baud) and did my Master thesis on Masers.

* I spent 28 years working at GE Corporate R&D. I have worked with the entire spectrum of GE business, from computer to medical/electrical distribution/aerospace/industrial controls/plastics to financial services. And I observed the internal politics and changes within GE management. I completed the sequence of GE General Management Courses. I have an appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses of GE, which is the only surviving member of the original Dow Jones Industrial Average.

* I took early retirement and joined a medical imaging start-up in the Seattle area; it went IPO and I left. Afterwards I tried venture capital, failed and then was briefly the CEO of a genomics startup, which spun out of U of Washington's Human Genome Project.

* I was involved in early Chinese-American community activities. After retirement I was briefly involved in local Washington politics. I supported Gary Locke for Governor and I also was a delegate to the Washington State's Republican Convention in 2000. I am now disillusioned by politics. In the last presidential election, I voted for a third party candidate.

* At 74 I am fully retired and spending my time traveling with my wife and visiting our grandchildren -- the joy of our lives.

I do make mistakes in my English (and getting worse as I age), hopefully they should not detract from the essence of the content.