Strategy
Work Ethic is Heart Knowledge
Most people know what apple pie is.
Only a fraction of people can actually bake an apple pie.
Only a fraction of those people can actually get themselves to bake apple pies on a regular basis (usually bakers).
Knowing what something is, is head knowledge. Knowing how to do something is hand knowledge. Knowing how to get yourself to do what you already know how to do is heart knowledge.
Some people are exceptional at head knowledge (those with high IQs). Others are exception at hand knowledge (many athletes, artists, or multi-skilled people).
I think that being exceptional at heart knowledge is what it means to have a good work ethic.
A good work ethic means, no matter what you do, you can do it consistently and with sufficiently quality, day-in and day-out. Which is neither a matter of information or of skill.
Like both head and hand, its a type of knowledge. Meaning it can grow over time, if you nurture it.
The 4Cs of Success
It’s hard to be successful if you don’t define the type of success.
I think there are 4 types of:
- Commercial success
- Critical success
- Credentialed success
- Cultural success
Commercial success means money. Critical success means tastemakers in the space see you as a success, typically in the form of an award. Credentialed success means you get a, well, credential (which could be a degree, or something like it). Cultural success means that you resonate deeply with a specific audience.
The type of success you’re pursuing changes what the path looks like.
Consider becoming a successful filmmaker:
- Commercial success = blockbuster
- Critical success = academy award winning film
- Credentialed success = completing film school
- Cultural success = cult classic (like Rocky Horror or Office Space)
What you need to learn (and how you need to create) in order to write a blockbuster is very different than what wins awards vs what school teaches you vs what will be quoted for years to come.
The path to success becomes much clearer once you know what you want it to look like.
...AND Profit.
A reader gave me feedback on the idea of [power and passion and profit. The connection wasn’t clear.
To clear things up:
- Power times passion times profit for success. They act as multipliers.
- Power times passion (without profit) doesn’t result in success.
Why and profit?
Over 60% of NBA players file for bankruptcy within 5 years after retiring.
That’s from 3 in 10,000 high school basketball players (that make it to the NBA).
In other words, they clearly have the power x passion for the game.
“Why do they go bankrupt? Why don’t they coach? Or run a summer camp for helping kids get into the NBA and charge $5k a pop?”
That’s what power x passion but without a pathway to profit looks like.
There are lots of ways to be profitable if you have the power x the passion.
But without x the profit, the formula doesn’t work.
And sometimes, you have to put in just as much energy into the “and profit” as you do into the power and the passion.
Seeking Alpha
We all want to do better than average. That’s the human condition. But each brand archetype approaches it differently.
I think it looks like this:
- Artists start with what resonates most with them
- Athletes start with what they can do best
- Entrepreneurs start with what can make money
- Investors start with what can reliably compound over time
- Engineers start with what problem can be solved
Here’s the thing: we all start from different places. But high success often ends in the same place.
Which is a combination of all of them.
Michael Jackson:
- did what resonated with him,
- in a way that he could do best,
- in a way that made money,
- that reliably compounded over time,
- and solved technical problems (at the time) to create the music that he wanted
So maybe finding Alpha isn’t just one thing.
Maybe it’s all of them.
The French Don't Have A Word For Entrepreneur
“The reason the French economy is struggling is because the French don’t have a word for entrepreneur.” — George W. Bush (allegedly)
Its funny because entrepreneur is a loanword from French.
Its also funny because its partly true.
We have more entrepreneurs (per capita) in America than in France.
Perhaps a better saying is “The reason the French economy is struggling is because the French don’t place a high cultural value on entrepreneurship.”
But that doesn’t have quite the same ring to it.
Power AND Passion AND Profit (or, Why Are Smart Kids Unsuccessful Adults?)
Its almost become a trope that the smart kid becomes the underperforming adult.
After spending time with lots of overperforming adults (those that get outsized results), I see a pattern:
- start with power
- develop their passion
- make a profit (not just financial)
Power, as in superpower. But we’re not superheroes, so its just power.
Passion, as in you do it 8-12 hours a day, every day, for the next 7 years.
Profit, as in how you do it gets a positive, fruitful result in your life.
Overperforming adults often weren’t overperforming kids. Which means they learned early on that they have one, maybe two powers.
And then they follow that formula.
Smart kids learn early on that they have a lot of powers.
But having lots of powers looks like the opposite of developing passion.
Its hard to spend 8-12 hours a day doing one thing, when you get the same results as others in 1-2 hours a day in everything. The perks are better.
And then profit doesn’t enter into the equation until its too late.
Acme vs. Coyote (vs. Entrepreneur)
The coyote is a metaphor. He represents our relentless pursuit of a desire, even to our own detriment.
The roadrunner is our desire. The more we seek to grasp it, the further out of grasp it seems.
The Buddhist answer is to relinquish the desire.
The American answer (Acme vs. Coyote) is to sue the companies that provide the (failing) means to get our results.
Neither is wrong, necessarily.
But the entrepreneur might say try different things (different company, different state, different animal) until you find success.
Cross-Train Cousin Disciplines
When we want to get good at something, we know to practice the discipline.
A lot of people will also cross-train with sibling disciplines.
A few examples:
- Saxophonists practice piano
- Actors practice directing
- A salsa dancer might practice ballet
Sibling disciplines are siblings because they come from the same family.
Which means they share the same culture.
Personally, I’ve gotten the most mileage out of cousin disciplines.
That’s my name for disciplines that share the same DNA, but have a completely different culture.
A few examples:
- A public speaker taking theatre classes (the family of standing on a stage, delivering memorized lines, and projecting to the back of the room)
- A singer taking voice acting training (tone production, vocal control, and range)
- A fiction writer taking improv classes (scenes, idea development, character interaction)
I get the most mileage out of pairing a rigorous cousin with a non-rigorous cousin, or a technical cousin with a non-technical cousin.
If you really want to spread your wings (and learn new things), cross-train cousin disciplines.
Finding Flow Like Jazz Musicians
Jazz improvisation is not a monolith.
If you want to improvise, you have multiple methodologies. A few:
- Call-and-response
- Guide-tone method
- Goal-tone method
- Vertical improvisation
- Horizontal improvisation
- Motivic development
- Licks, riffs, quotes
- Patterns
- Bebop
I think that which method you gravitate towards tells you something about yourself.
That would mean the contrapositive is true, too.
Do you like using what you already know? You might like vertical or horizontal improvisation (scales and arpeggios, the stuff you already practice every day.)
Do you like to repeat the same idea over and over, with variation? You might like patterns (pentatonic), or perhaps even motivic development.
Do you know where you want to end your lines and phrases? Perhaps try the guide-tone or goal-tone methods.
Do you like to compose and polish small bits of brilliance, then show it off? You might like licks, riffs, and quotes.
Do you like the feeling and flow of poetry, or moment-by-moment decision-making? You might like call-and-response, or bebop.
An idea for finding flow: figure out which you can practice, for hours on end, that brings you joy.
The Art of War (and Chess and Fiction Writing)
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." — Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Sun Tzu gives us two states for success:
- Know thyself
- Know thy enemy
But in chess, this is not enough.
You also need to know your openings, know your principles, and know the game you’re playing (a one-minute bullet match online is a different game than a 3 hour classical over-the-board tournament).
Which together might be something like:
- Know the players (psychology)
- Know your point (plan)
- Know ideas (principles)
- Know the parameters (sport)
Fiction writing is like chess, in that knowing your strengths and weaknesses as a writer, and the challenge of getting published before you, is not enough.
You also need to know your characters, your genre, and the audience you’re writing for.
Which together might be something like:
- Authorial truth (what you want to happen)
- Genre truth (what the conventions expect to happen)
- Character truth (what feels true to those experiencing the story)
- Audience truth (what needs to be true for the reader)
The strategy of chess is the interplay between what you know about yourself, what time control you’re playing, what opening you’re in, and which chess principles apply right now.
The strategy of fiction writing is the interplay between the story you want to tell, the story your publisher wants to promote, the story your audience wants to read, and the story that does the characters justice.
From that perspective, strategy is, indeed, an art.