|
What matters more: what happens, or what you do?
This book is both a simple and brilliant affirmation of Internal Locus of Control.
Like the rest of Jim Collins' work, it's thoroughly researched. The book itself is only 198 pages. The remaining third is substantiation: detailed research findings, and end notes. When you read a Collins book, you're not just getting one author's take. You're getting the longitudinal findings of a rigorous research team.
I mean, there are books, and then there are books. Some books are glorified brochures or sales funnels. Some books are one author's take at a point in time. Some books are a team effort over a period of time. This book is of the last kind; which, in my opinion, is the most valuable and the best use of R&D time.
In this respect, it reminds me of George Vaillant's book Aging Well or Gary Keller's Millionaire Real Estate Investor. Collins' books are team efforts.
The Take-Aways, by Chapter
Chapter 1: Thriving In Uncertainty. This book was written in 2011. Now it's 2026 and AI is all the rage. Can I use it to get rich? Can I use it to save time and reduce tedium? Will it replace me? What about ulterior political motives, and ethics? So many questions.
It's almost as if we're experiencing more uncertainty now than we were when it was written. In some ways, I'm glad I waited. Reading it now has been most timely.
Chapter 2: 10Xers. 10X companies were those that outperformed comparable competitors in the obvious metrics (share price, profit, cash flow) under comparable conditions. Collins and his team found that 10X companies exhibited these three traits:
An irony about 10Xers is how, although they had the best metrics, they didn't chase them. They were motivated by a sense of mission. They valued impact, contribution, and purpose. They pursued that, and the metrics followed.
Chapter 3: 20 Mile March. This chapter focused on the Fanatical Discipline piece - in particular, about regulated pace: the idea that moderate and steady wins the race.
I underlined this: "We are ultimately responsible for improving performance. We never blame circumstance. We never blame the environment" (55).
Chapter 4: Fire Bullets, Then Cannonballs. This chapter focused on the Empirical Creativity piece. I found it noteworthy how 10X companies didn't stand on the bleeding edge of technology or innovation. They were cautious, and used innovation and tech selectively, according to what furthered their mission.
The "bullets" analogy is about low cost, low risk, low distraction experimentation until you figure out what works. (That's empiricism.) The "cannonballs" analogy is about investing more resources after the bullets have hit the target.
Chapter 5: Leading Above the Death Line. This chapter is about the Productive Paranoia piece. It compares oxygen reserves on a mountaineering expedition with cash reserves in business. It emphasized "Zooming out, then zooming in." That is, step back and look at the big picture, ask yourself what might go wrong, then zoom back in and do something about it. They think first, then take massive action.
Chapter 6: SMaC. SMaC means, Specific, Methodical, and Consistent. It can be used as an adjective, a noun, and a verb. As a noun, it's a "recipe" for "the way we do things." To SMaC, as a verb, means, create a recipe. In volatile, uncertain conditions (like now, with the AI opportunity/threat), having a SMaC is a competitive advantage and a key to survival.
In the margins of this chapter I wrote, "Resolute. Steadfast. Staunch." I also underlined, "The signature of mediocrity is chronic inconsistency" (138).
Chapter 7: Return on Luck. This chapter shows how seven 10X companies had less good luck and more bad luck than their competitors, yet excelled. This is because they knew how to mitigate and learn from bad luck; and leverage, or lean in, to good luck. I underlined, "Build deep and enduring relationships with people for whom you'd risk your life, and who'd risk their lives for you" (179).
The Epilogue begins, "We sense a dangerous disease infecting our modern culture and eroding hope: an increasingly prevalent view that greatness owes more to circumstance, even luck, than to action and discipline - that what happens to us matters more than what we do."
It continues, ". . . greatness is first and foremost a matter of conscious choice and discipline." It concludes, ". . . drive and standards are ultimately internal, rising from somewhere deep inside . . . . In the end, we can control only a tiny sliver of what happens to us. But even so, we are free to choose, free to become great by choice" (183).
It's almost as if we're experiencing more uncertainty now than we were when it was written. In some ways, I'm glad I waited. Reading it now has been most timely.
Chapter 2: 10Xers. 10X companies were those that outperformed comparable competitors in the obvious metrics (share price, profit, cash flow) under comparable conditions. Collins and his team found that 10X companies exhibited these three traits:
- Fanatical Discipline,
- Empirical Creativity, and
- Productive Paranoia.
An irony about 10Xers is how, although they had the best metrics, they didn't chase them. They were motivated by a sense of mission. They valued impact, contribution, and purpose. They pursued that, and the metrics followed.
Chapter 3: 20 Mile March. This chapter focused on the Fanatical Discipline piece - in particular, about regulated pace: the idea that moderate and steady wins the race.
I underlined this: "We are ultimately responsible for improving performance. We never blame circumstance. We never blame the environment" (55).
Chapter 4: Fire Bullets, Then Cannonballs. This chapter focused on the Empirical Creativity piece. I found it noteworthy how 10X companies didn't stand on the bleeding edge of technology or innovation. They were cautious, and used innovation and tech selectively, according to what furthered their mission.
The "bullets" analogy is about low cost, low risk, low distraction experimentation until you figure out what works. (That's empiricism.) The "cannonballs" analogy is about investing more resources after the bullets have hit the target.
Chapter 5: Leading Above the Death Line. This chapter is about the Productive Paranoia piece. It compares oxygen reserves on a mountaineering expedition with cash reserves in business. It emphasized "Zooming out, then zooming in." That is, step back and look at the big picture, ask yourself what might go wrong, then zoom back in and do something about it. They think first, then take massive action.
Chapter 6: SMaC. SMaC means, Specific, Methodical, and Consistent. It can be used as an adjective, a noun, and a verb. As a noun, it's a "recipe" for "the way we do things." To SMaC, as a verb, means, create a recipe. In volatile, uncertain conditions (like now, with the AI opportunity/threat), having a SMaC is a competitive advantage and a key to survival.
In the margins of this chapter I wrote, "Resolute. Steadfast. Staunch." I also underlined, "The signature of mediocrity is chronic inconsistency" (138).
Chapter 7: Return on Luck. This chapter shows how seven 10X companies had less good luck and more bad luck than their competitors, yet excelled. This is because they knew how to mitigate and learn from bad luck; and leverage, or lean in, to good luck. I underlined, "Build deep and enduring relationships with people for whom you'd risk your life, and who'd risk their lives for you" (179).
The Epilogue begins, "We sense a dangerous disease infecting our modern culture and eroding hope: an increasingly prevalent view that greatness owes more to circumstance, even luck, than to action and discipline - that what happens to us matters more than what we do."
It continues, ". . . greatness is first and foremost a matter of conscious choice and discipline." It concludes, ". . . drive and standards are ultimately internal, rising from somewhere deep inside . . . . In the end, we can control only a tiny sliver of what happens to us. But even so, we are free to choose, free to become great by choice" (183).
Application to Life & Work
SMaC. When I started my Economics practice in 1996, it was an outcome of rigorous independent Personal Finance study. I read every book I could find on the subject until it all began sounding familiar. What they all shared in common were,
- Have a long term plan.
- Break it down into annual budgets.
- Track the budgets.
- Persist. Review & revise.
The long term plan is now my signature Lifetime Savings Plan (LSP). What's unique about it is, it is both a defined benefit, AND defined contribution plan. It reconciles contributions with benefits over time. Most planning methods don't do that; they're point-in-time probability assessments using "Monte Carlo Simulations" designed for people who already have substantial assets. They say, "Tell me your assets and your goals, and I'll tell you the probability that you can afford your goals."
But if the probability is low, or zero? It doesn't tell you what to do. I think that sucks. I think everybody should have a plan, even if they're under water.
But my LSP offering has never been much of a hit. Why? Because of the despair described in this book. Normal people don't have an Internal Locus of Control. Their Locus of Control is external. In other words, they believe what matters most is what happens to them, not what they do. They're infected by the disease described in this book's Epilogue . . . which I would call Despair, or Learned Helplessness.
So when they look on the goals on the worksheet, they're not inspired. The feeling is, "Why bother? Those look impossibe. I'm struggling to make it to Friday, and you want me to plan my whole life?" They close the laptop and crack a beer.
That's how it works. That's what I've experienced.
But there have been a few great ones who leaned in to the process, made their plans, and executed. They're multi millionaires now.
It's an exceptional trait, Internal Locus of Control. It's a great trait. It's what characterizes 10Xers.
So those four things - plan, budget, track, persist - they're part of my SMaC.
Fanatical Discipline. Another part is fanatical time keeping. Since August of 2015, I've been tracking every waking hour of my life, all 5,840 hours (that's 365 days x 16 waking hours), as if they were money.
Because you know the old saying, that time is money.
Do you really believe that?
I've come to learn that time is more valuable than money. Just ask anyone over the age of 60, and they'll tell you. If they could buy more time, they would.
We can't buy time back. But we can do the next best thing: track it like we track money. This has done wonders for my memory. I have better recall now than I had in my 20s - not because my mind is sharper, but because I have a tool now that I didn't have then.
I've built an app and used it for going on 11 years. It works great. $199/user/month. Worth it. Contact me to get yours.
Sense of Mission. I call my practice Making End$ Meet because that's the mission. That's what everybody needs to do. Indeed, that's a tongue-in-cheek understatement. We actually need to make them overlap, generating a surplus to invest. But in the long run, the ends meet. I don't call it "Freeberg Economic Consulting" or whatever. No indeed: it isn't about me; it's about the mission.
Empiricism. In my work, I encounter a lot of emotion. How do I deal with it? I try to remain empirical.
Say there's an argument, and both parties think they're right. What do I do? I look at the facts of the matter. I bring clarity and reconciliation. It's refreshingly dispassionate. For more on this, see my review of Cy Wakeman's book No Ego.
Productive Paranoia / 20 Mile March / Leading Above the Death Line. Conventional wisdom says, "Have an Emergency Fund equal to 3-12 months' living expenses." I'm more paranoid than that. I say, "Recognize how you will use that fund and need to replenish it now and then. I recommend assuming once every four years."
So when I write a LSP, emergencies aren't just covered once: accumulate the fund and you're done. No indeed: my clients pace themselves (20 Mile March) to use and replenish that fund every four years throughout their lifetime.
Zoom Out, Zoom In. Every day, I have a ritual: look around, look back, look forward. I study the news, I review what I did on the current date over the past decade (in my time keeping app), and I look at my calendar (also in the app), what's coming up. I try to identify what's most important, and do that until it's done. Whatever isn't done is rescheduled: drag, drop in the calendar.
Seasonally, I'll also do a SWOT Analysis. Every season is different. Over the course of 90 days, something has switched. It never fails. I draw some conclusions from the analysis, and zoom in on them for the next 90 days.
Firing Bullets. I haven't gone all-in on AI. So far I've limited my involvement to a deep dive into ChatGPT, seeing how much it can do and how well I can train it to know me. I'm looking at Claud and recommending Claude Co-work to clients who need to process overwhelming amounts of content, like a jammed email in box. What little I've done has supported my purposes and been extremely helpful. I've also attended a few low or no cost webinars and kept careful, detailed notes for future reference.
What's Great
These are things I've always done. I didn't think they were great or exceptional. Heck: reading books and writing book reports . . . didn't we all do that in school? Is that great? Is that exceptional? How about keeping notes? Didn't we all do that too? Is it great? Is it exceptional?
I've never thought so, but apparently it is. So I've had to adjust my understanding; my view of myself, and of the world.
Here's what philosopher Jared Henderson has to say about the situation . . . why reading, writing, and deeper reflection ("Deep Work") are now exceptional and great; whereas in the past, they used to be ordinary:
I've never thought so, but apparently it is. So I've had to adjust my understanding; my view of myself, and of the world.
Here's what philosopher Jared Henderson has to say about the situation . . . why reading, writing, and deeper reflection ("Deep Work") are now exceptional and great; whereas in the past, they used to be ordinary:
Liza Libes of "Pens and Poison" echoes Henderson's observation in her own way:
However you slice it . . . reading, writing, and thinking used to be ordinary. Now they're not.
One outcome of that adjustment is this Client Fit Assessment, which I encourage you to try. If you get a high score, we might work well together. You'd probably appreciate my help.
Not everybody does. But I don't need to help everybody. Like Abraham Lincoln said, you don't have to please all of the people, all of the time. I just need to help an appreciative few.
I hope you've found this book review helpful and time saving. Thanks for reading, and please accept my best wishes for a happy, safe, and prosperous future.
