Are You Running With Your Shoes Untied? - Or, the Despise of Failure by Self-Inflicted Wounds
Gregg Zegarelli Esq.
Managing Shareholder at Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC
For a brief moment, imagine that you are a world-class runner.
You're a natural, and you have have unmatched speed. It's race day for the championship. You line up at the starting line. Bang! And, you're off. You negotiate the first turn, far in front of the others. You're in first place, and you're going to win, big time. You approach the second turn, and then, and then, you trip and fall.
With all your gifts and talent—and now with your bleeding knees—you lose the race!
Your coach runs over to you, screaming in wonderment, "What happened? What happened?" You look at your feet, and respond in embarrassment, "Well, Coach, I didn't tie my shoes."
"Are you're kidding me? Please tell me that you're kidding me!" exclaims the coach.
Anyone seeing this condition would say it is unbelievable that a runner would run a race with untied shoes. It's contextually ridiculous, and most of us "success-oriented" business people (being trained in goal achievement) (or purporting to be) would not be overly forgiving to this athlete, if at all. The despise of every true competitor is to be defeated from within, being the self-inflicted wound.
And, yet, it happens metaphorically all the time in business, political systems, and just about everything else where there is a failure in achieving the primary objective.
Simply stated, we trip ourselves up.
By now, perhaps you heard of the XY-male pole vaulter whose protruding groin hit the cross-bar on a pole vault as a cause for him to fail in the 2024 Olympics. A lot of common giggling people thought this context was funny. I am not one of them. I am not one of the persons who laughed about this personal, team, and patriotic tragedy.
I once went into a coffee house and ordered coffee. The coffee was full of grinds. I dutifully brought it to the attention of the management and received a "fixed" new cup of java. I chalked it up to a mistake. I went back a second time, and same thing. Again I received a "fixed" cup, but I never went back. The place is now out of business. I have described this as, "If you're a pizza shop and you make bad coffee, perhaps it is forgivable. But, if you're a coffee shop selling bad coffee, it's unforgivable, because coffee is 'what you do.''
I used the phrase "you're running with your shoes untied," for the first time as an impromptu exclamation. I was giving advice my client entrepreneur, who later said it was the best advice ever received. The situation was basically this: My client was a younger entrepreneur (under the age of 30) with a finance background, already making almost 7 digits per year. My client was "pressing me" to save a few hundred dollars on a tax form that I believed was overly "aggressive." I told my client it was a hundred dollars today, but, the seed of it would grow to a thousand dollars tomorrow, and then a hundred thousand dollars later, and, and, sooner or later in life, my client was bound to trip up a financially stellar career by trying too hard to save some pennies, relatively. It's the habits and little things that tend to trip us up.
Now, there are several different "leadership and adversity" posts that address the point of "the primary objective" and "objective-oriented leadership," noting:
All these posts expose a particular formula of goal achievement, if perhaps also exposing a common hypocrisy:
Where there is a primary objective, things must yield to it. Moreover, that yielding tends to be painful for a lot of people, and misunderstood by people who are not trained to understand "goal achievement." There is the wisdom of choosing the objective and the strategy, and then there is the courage and discipline in the implementation. Hope, feelings and other "emotions" tend to trip us up.
But, again, here is what we know: The one thing...the one thing that every champion despises is the "self-inflicted wound."
The self-inflicted wound manifests in a lot of ways, but the point is always the same: someone does something that negatively affects the critical path of success of the person, or perhaps the team, the company, or the country. A foreseeable issue not duly managed that leads toward failure of the primary objective. Sometimes the cause and effect are not overt, but subtle, which leaves the stakeholders not understanding why failure occurred.
Now I will show you three videos that are correlated regarding "self-inflicted" wounds, or the potential for it. The videos are not fun, but instructional. When you review the videos, it is not so much important to agree with the situation or the participants, but rather to critically think about the formula and what is really going on. The article links above have more "deepened" detail.
In each case, remember the basic formula as to what is the objective and what is being suggested as a self-inflicted wound, formulaically. What is the "one" essential purpose of the thing and is the thing at issue aligned properly to that essential purpose. Sometimes business people use the term "laser focused" implying a primary objective; to wit: "Our primary objective is [this or that], we are laser focused on that one thing, and everything we do must be aligned to achieve that one thing."
There is a goal. You help it, or you hurt it. It's that simple. It is a brutal type of goal-oriented mathematics, but effective, if not necessary.
Mark it carefully. The key to watching these videos is to perceive that the common opinion by current narrative suggests to side with the objective failure, under the guise of soft nobility for the "victim." The current social narrative draws us to the coddling soft side.
Stated another way, a victim-oriented perspective tends to divert our attention to pity, to empathize, to forgive, and to excuse the actual cause of tending failure of the objective, by a form of goal-achievement hypocrisy. [1]
This might be said differently and colloquially as, "one of the conversants is just not being nice." Alas, the adage, "The road to failure is paved with hurt feelings."
In fact, in the third video, listen for, "How did this make you feel?," by the newscaster, which has no asserted bearing on the primary objective to be achieved, displaces attribution of essential fault, and is (at least on this task) upside-down by focusing on the feelings of the target for required correction.
Yes, there may be "better approaches to interpersonal communication and expression," but that is a different issue, not to be confused and conflated. [1a] That is, the "leader's correction to alignment" might be presented "nicer" or less acerbically, but that is a different issue.
In each case, it might be said that there's a hard side and a soft side.
One video is Steve Jobs (hard) v. Wozniak (soft), one video is Patton (hard) v. soldier with "battle fatigue" (soft), and one video is Donald Trump (hard) v. Miss Universe (soft). You can love or hate Jobs, Patton and Trump, but watch unemotionally and formulaically (if you have the internal fortitude and critical-thinking self-control to do so objectively) for the correlation of critical path alignment to objective in light of self-inflicted wounds.
"Common-think" tends to get confused with emotional rhetoric that forgets the context or is diverted from the primary objective, if not also perhaps with the defeating hypocrisy of goal-oriented achievement. [*1] Whether "being both nice and successful" is achievable is not the question. That is a second question, not the first question. The first question is whether there is a misalignment on the soft side; the excuse and the remedy follow in due course.
Since the concept is perhaps counter-intuitive to some, and may be resisted by a current common-think narrative, I will break down the logistics process for the formulaic context:
First, Wisdom to Determine "The Good." In each case, there is a leader who is dutifully charged to implement "the good"; that is, what is wise to serve the relevant eco-system, with that eco-system relying upon the leader to achieve that objective. In one video, the country determined that winning the war was good. In one video, the business determined that selling new a product was good. [*1] And, in one video, the pageant determined that a representative spokesperson was good. This is presupposed in each video. [Challenging the determination of the objective by the eco-system, such as countries don't need to win wars, or businesses don't need to sell products, or pageants don't need have representative spokespersons, does not serve the precise subject at issue in this post.]
Second, the Leader's Judgment as to Alignment. In each case, the context presents a form a judgment by the dutiful leader as to whether something is or will be out of alignment; that is, the leader's determination that something is or would be contradicting the objective that the leader, by duty, must achieve. In one video, a soldier who cannot fight (for any reason whatsoever) tends to contradict the military objective. In one video, using the limited time of audience attention and focus away from the new product, tends to contradict the business objective. In one video, a pageant spokesperson who no longer represents the beauty standards of the pageant, tends to contradict the pageant objective. [In the last case, perhaps I should overtly reconcile that the issue of female beauty at any weight or age is not the issue, often conflated. The issue is whether one particular spokesperson is aligned to the contextual objective.] Each of these tendencies, replicating, tends failure of the objective.
What is "good" for each of the soldier, the former computer programmers, and the beauty queen, is not the same as what is "good" for the objective serving the eco-system that is relying upon systemic success. [1b]
Third, the Misalignment Excuse (Reason) and Correction. In each video, the context presents a form of fair excuse for the condition that tugs on human pity (or empathy). This emotional intrusion (rightly or wrongly) into an onlooker's thinking is in the same human space of applied rhetoric. Yes, perhaps it is noble to have pity (or empathy) for the solider who is "battle fatigued," and for the programmers who are due appreciation [1c], and for the beauty queen who succumbs to eating. But that is a different issue, often homogenized, confused and conflated. The objective is achieved or not achieved, and it does not care why or why not. Often forgotten by the applied victim-narrative rhetoric, there tends to be an eco-system that is injured by relying upon the success of the primary objective. The leader must make a determination as to the correction. Leaders, teachers, coaches and other "movers" of people have two essential tools: pleasure and pain. [1d, 1e] The leader picks the tool, and not every outsider can completely understand the leader's personal, contextual, dynamic, and complex choice. Sometimes praise and pride do the job, and sometimes condemnation and ridicule do the job. Sometimes the correction needs to be done publicly and sometimes privately. It depends. [Challenging the proper tool is not at issue in this post. Whether any leader in the videos chose the wrong tool, or overused it, is not the issue. Judging a misalignment tendency, and how to prevent or to correct misalignment, are different tasks.] [*1]
Therefore, analytical judgment for these three videos requires compartmentalization. The point of this exercise is whether, with regard to Step 2 (actually, the first or only step in this post) is whether you as the reader can admit that the leader at issue is correct in the (hard) judgment. Not whether the eco-system's wisdom for the goal to be achieved is noble, and not whether the excuse or remedy is appropriate.
Emotionally hating someone for being "mean" is not a criterion for objective determination of objective goal-oriented competency, unless that attribute itself has a material impact on achievement of the primary objective, which is always a judgment for wisdom. Stated another way, some people are so filled with emotional hate for a leader, that the analysis of whether the leader is actually correct in judgment of the failure tendency is refused to be recognized, thereby causing such people to swirl around in a homogenized state that fails to pinpoint the necessary focus of corrections to prevent systemic goal-achievement failure. [*1a]
This critical-thinking exercise suggests that you "flip your common empathetic perspective" from Woz to Jobs, from the soldier to Patton, and from Miss Universe to Donald Trump, by application of the above, understanding the nature of the objective, and each champion's disdain for self-inflicted wounds that tend failure to achieve the stated objective. [2, 3] The more difficult is the exercise, the more it tends to be necessary; thus, the adage, "The weakest muscle gets the most sore."
Indeed, as a critical thinker, or perhaps an interested dutiful leader, don't succumb to getting angry or insulted by the videos. Just watch for the presence of the tendency for a self-inflicted wound that, replicated, tends failure and injury to the eco-system's stated goal. It happens for runners, it happens for beer companies, and it happens for countries. [4, 5] And hope, desire, pity and empathy don't tie those shoes.
领英推荐
[3] A Message to Garcia (and Every Entrepreneur) - Abridgment Series [#GRZ_7] "Nothing is said about the employer who grows old before his time in a vain attempt to get frowsy never-do-wells to do intelligent work; and the long patient striving with "help" that does nothing but loaf when his back is turned.?In every store and factory there is a constant weeding-out process going on. The employer is constantly sending away "help" that have shown their incapacity to further the interests of the business, and others are being taken on.?No matter how good times are, this sorting continues, only if times are hard and work is scarce, the sorting is done finer—but out and forever out, the incompetent and unworthy go. It is the survival of the fittest.?Self-interest prompts every employer to keep the best—those who can carry a message to Garcia."
The One Thing
Nicety in the context of the Primary Objective
"Via ad defectum stratum est laesi affectus." ("The road to failure is paved with hurt feelings."); "Infima musculus accipit acerbissima." ("The weakest muscle gets the most sore.") ~grz
*?Gregg Zegarelli, Esq., earned both his Bachelor of Arts Degree and his Juris Doctorate from Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His dual major areas of study were History from the College of Liberal Arts and Accounting from the Business School (qualified to sit for the CPA examination), with dual minors in Philosophy and Political Science. He has enjoyed Adjunct Professorships in the Duquesne University Graduate Leadership Master Degree Program (The Leader as Entrepreneur; Developing Leadership Character Through Adversity) and the University of Pittsburgh Law School (The Anatomy of a Deal). He is admitted to various courts throughout the United States of America.
Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.,?is Managing Shareholder of?Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC.?Gregg is nationally rated as "superb" and has more than 35 years of experience working with entrepreneurs and companies of all sizes, including startups,?INC. 500, and publicly traded companies.?He is author of?One: The Unified Gospel of Jesus,?and?The Business of Aesop? article series, and co-author with his father,?Arnold Zegarelli, of?The Essential Aesop: For Business, Managers, Writers and Professional Speakers.?Gregg is a frequent lecturer, speaker and faculty for a variety of educational and other institutions.?
? 2024 Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.?Gregg can be contacted through?LinkedIn.
The statements or opinions made in this article are solely the author's own and not representative of any institution regarding which the author is affiliated.
#GreggZegarelli #Patton #ObjectiveBasedLeadership #GoalOrientedLeadership #PriestPattonScale #PattonSlap #SteveJobs #Hiring #Wozniak #Jobs #Apple #Trump #Wisdom #Leadership #Zegarelli #GRZ_208
Managing Shareholder at Technology & Entrepreneurial Ventures Law Group, PC
2 个月Added another video illustrating courtesy relative to accomplishing the primary objective. [R]. https://youtu.be/U6avWk2mavk