Adam Grant, author of Think Again and Give and Take, posted this article: I study highly successful people for a living. Here are 11 little habits they practice every day. Check it out!
Showing posts with label growth mindset. Show all posts
Showing posts with label growth mindset. Show all posts
Monday, November 13, 2023
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
Lessons from the NFL AFC Championship
I know many people
outside of New England are tired of seeing the New England Patriots playing in
the Super Bowl. There are a lot of reasons why the Pats dominate so much but I
believe we can apply a couple things Tom Brady said in the post-game
interview of the 2019 NFL’s AFC Championship (in which the New England
Patriots beat the Kansas City Chiefs 37-31). We can apply these ideas not just to
sports but how we live. I’ve provided his response to a reporter’s question
with key words in bold.
Q: How do you stay so calm in the biggest moments,
especially when your team is down and you have to drive the team right back?
BRADY: “Part of playing sports is just
staying in the moment. We always say
one play at a time and you can’t make up
for things that happen in the past. You just have to think about what you are
going to do moving forward. Start of the fourth quarter, they scored. We
are up three to start the fourth quarter. What a great opportunity to be against this team and to be ahead three in
the fourth quarter with a chance to win is pretty sweet. They blew so many
teams out this year. It is just a great
opportunity for us, and we took advantage of it.”
His first point, staying
in the moment, is key. I’ve seen players and teams get desperate or angry when
losing or when calls go against them then try for plays or shots that aren’t
part of their normal repertoire. They’re upset about what just happened then
try to make up for it by hitting the ball harder or going for shots they don’t
“own.” For instance, in tennis (the sport with which I’m most familiar because
I play it almost daily) I’ve seen players go for a shot or an angle that they
normally wouldn’t try if they were ahead. Instead, they often end up making an
unforced error, which only makes things worse. (I know because I’ve done
it!)
As Brady says it’s
better to forget about past mistakes or calls that go against you and focus on
two things: stay in the moment while thinking of what you’re going to do next.
One tip I use in tennis after making a mistake is to tell myself, “Next time”
while making a couple shadow swings on how I wanted to hit the shot that I just
missed. “Next time” means I’m telling myself I’ll do it better the next time I
have the chance. This attitude implicitly represents a focus on the process rather
than the results. It also reflects their confidence in themselves. And, it also
means that their self-esteem isn’t tied to the outcome. Sure, it doesn’t feel
good to lose but someone like Brady or Federer just use the loss as motivation
to learn from what happened and try to improve. (This also reflects something I’ve
written about in a previous post: the difference between having a growth mindset rather than a fixed mindset.)
Later Brady said that
the Pats had a “great opportunity” when starting the fourth quarter with a
three point lead over a team that was seeded #1 and had beaten other teams by
large margins. I find it interesting that he didn’t say it was a challenge or
that they were nervous. This is one of the qualities I’ve noticed with
champions like the Brady, the Patriots or, switching to tennis again, Roger Federer.
They are unflappable. They see facing a
tough opponent as an opportunity to excel rather than a challenge for which
they might not be good enough.
So what accounts for
this calmness? I’d say these factors: focus on the present, confidence in
yourself without tying the outcome to your self-esteem and a process-oriented
mentality.
Labels:
challenges,
competition,
growth mindset,
New England Patriots,
tennis
Thursday, July 5, 2018
What Separates Champions From ‘Almost Champions’? -- Science of Us
What Separates Champions From ‘Almost Champions’? -- Science of Us
I’m going to start of with a long series of quotes from an article in The Cut titled “What Separates Champions From ‘Almost Champions’?
I figure someone reading all of this might ask how studying world-class performers applies to us. How many of us really fall into that category? I know it will sound arrogant or obnoxious but I like to think I applied these ideas when designing and delivering presentations when I was working, in my tennis game and in other areas of my life such as relationships, etc. While I’ll probably never climb to the A level of players at the clubs where I play I do know my game has continually improved thanks to my constant investment into getting better. I like to think I’m now a B+ player! ;-) That’s why I believe the quote at the end of the article is key, which is why I’m repeating it below.
I’m going to start of with a long series of quotes from an article in The Cut titled “What Separates Champions From ‘Almost Champions’?
It’s the perennial million-dollar question of nature versus nurture, sure. But the difference between the greats and the almost-greats (which, by the way, applies well beyond sports) also appears to be at least partially driven by one specific thing — how each group responds to adversity. The greats rise to the challenge and put in persistent effort; the almost-greats lose steam and regress.
For a recent study published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, talent development researchers Dave Collins, Aine MacNamara, and Neil McCarthy examined the differences between athletes who overcame adversity and went on to become world-class (what they call super champions) and those who struggled in the face of hardship (the hearthbreakingly named “almost champions”) . Whereas super champions were playing in premier leagues and/or competing on national teams (think: Olympics), almost champions had achieved well at the youth level but were playing in the less prestigious leagues as adults.
The researchers found that super champions were characterized “by an almost fanatical reaction to challenge.” They viewed challenges in a positive light — as opportunities to grow — and overcame them thanks to a “never satisfied” attitude. This runs in contrast to almost champions, who blamed setbacks on external causes, became negative, and lost motivation.
....
Super champions were driven from within. Their primary concern was self-improvement. They held themselves to high standards, but judged themselves against prior versions of themselves, not against others.
Almost champions, however, were focused on external benchmarks, like national rankings or how they compared to rivals, a mind-set the researchers speculate why almost champions got discouraged during rough patches.
.......
World-class performers, then, don’t rely on either nature or nurture, but on a combination of the two — and they are really good at nurturing their nature. All of which suggests the recipe that gives rise to super champions is worth emulating: Individuals who demonstrate persistent effort follow their interests; practice foremost to get better, not to outdo others; derive satisfaction from within; and feel constantly supported, but not pressured, in their journey toward achievement. If these criteria are in place, experiencing failure doesn’t weaken motivation — it bolsters it. In the words of Michael Joyner, an expert on human performance at Mayo Clinic, “With enough persistent effort, most people can get pretty good at anything.”These results touch on a number of topics I’ve covered in previous posts: having a growth mindset versus a fixed mindset, focusing on the process rather than results, focusing inwardly on how you’re performing per your own standards instead of worrying about how you’re being perceived externally by your opponent or your friends, engaging in deliberate practice to improve, not just repeating what you already do well and not pushing yourself in practice and having grit as a personal quality. The Cut article doesn’t specifically touch on all of these points while I think they’re all implicitly involved.
I figure someone reading all of this might ask how studying world-class performers applies to us. How many of us really fall into that category? I know it will sound arrogant or obnoxious but I like to think I applied these ideas when designing and delivering presentations when I was working, in my tennis game and in other areas of my life such as relationships, etc. While I’ll probably never climb to the A level of players at the clubs where I play I do know my game has continually improved thanks to my constant investment into getting better. I like to think I’m now a B+ player! ;-) That’s why I believe the quote at the end of the article is key, which is why I’m repeating it below.
In the words of Michael Joyner, an expert on human performance at Mayo Clinic, “With enough persistent effort, most people can get pretty good at anything.”Amen!
Friday, June 29, 2018
Puzzles versus Problems
I’m reading Elevate: An Essential Guide to Life by Joseph Deitch (Greenleaf Book Group Press, 2018) which was given to me as a Father’s Day gift by my son-in-law. (Thank you!) Deitch proposes an idea for handling challenges that caught my attention. Deitch introduces the section by talking about responding to new challenges by reminding yourself you have the basic skills to try anything rather than saying “I can’t do that” or “I haven’t learned how to do that.” “A central insight of Elevate” is that certain skills are so basic, so fundamental, so universally applicable that they drive achievement in every conceivable endeavor.”
This leads into Deitch’s idea.
This idea resides in the beginning of the book where he lays the groundwork for these universal skills which are fleshed out in the second half of the book. I like his idea because, like him, I believe our mind reacts differently when something is framed as a puzzle, something to figure out, rather than a challenge which is usually interpreted as something that could exceed our abilities.
I also believe there is a connection between Deitch’s idea and the “can I fix this?” approach of Bob the Builder that I have discussed in a previous post. I think the mind reacts differently if we ask ourselves “Can I figure out this puzzle? Yes, I can!” versus “I’m faced with a challenge that I have to overcome.”
I think these approaches of looking at things as puzzles and answering the question if can we figure it out with a “yes” also ties in to Carol Dweck’s growth mindset as opposed to a fixed mindset. Someone with a growth mindset sees puzzles (or challenges) as a chance to grow, to learn to do something new whereas someone with a fixed mindset sees challenges as a threat to their abilities. If they don’t figure out the answer to a challenge the fixed mindset person thinks that’s proof of their inherent limitations. On the other hand the growth mindset person concludes that not being able to solve a problem just shows where they need to improve without it lowering their self-esteem.
This leads into Deitch’s idea.
One of my favorite examples of the enormous difference this mental orientation can make is based on a story told by the philosopher George Gurdjieff. Growing up in Turkey, Gurdjieff benefited from an educational system organized around solving puzzles rather than memorizing facts. As a result, he came to see the challenges life presented as a series of puzzles to be solved. Instead of thinking, “I don’t know what to do because I’ve never faced this before,” or, “I can’t do such and such because I haven’t learned how to do it yet,” he would think, “Oh, here’s another puzzle. I’ll figure it out.” ...
Inspired by Gurdjieff’s example, I learned to frame challenges as enjoyable puzzles to be solved rather than as intimidating predicaments. ... Turning situations from problems into puzzles is a universal principle with enormous ramifications.
This idea resides in the beginning of the book where he lays the groundwork for these universal skills which are fleshed out in the second half of the book. I like his idea because, like him, I believe our mind reacts differently when something is framed as a puzzle, something to figure out, rather than a challenge which is usually interpreted as something that could exceed our abilities.
I also believe there is a connection between Deitch’s idea and the “can I fix this?” approach of Bob the Builder that I have discussed in a previous post. I think the mind reacts differently if we ask ourselves “Can I figure out this puzzle? Yes, I can!” versus “I’m faced with a challenge that I have to overcome.”
I think these approaches of looking at things as puzzles and answering the question if can we figure it out with a “yes” also ties in to Carol Dweck’s growth mindset as opposed to a fixed mindset. Someone with a growth mindset sees puzzles (or challenges) as a chance to grow, to learn to do something new whereas someone with a fixed mindset sees challenges as a threat to their abilities. If they don’t figure out the answer to a challenge the fixed mindset person thinks that’s proof of their inherent limitations. On the other hand the growth mindset person concludes that not being able to solve a problem just shows where they need to improve without it lowering their self-esteem.
Thursday, July 7, 2016
Resilence and Choking: Federer vs. Cilic Wimbledon Match
Yesterday Roger Federer narrowly avoided being eliminated from Wimbledon at the hands of Marin Cilic. He was down two sets to none and even had a couple match points against him. Yet he prevailed. We think that Roger has nerves of steel and therefore never chokes but he did shank several balls, revealing that, yes, even Roger is human. In fact, I read a book on Federer recently that reveals he was very temperamental as a junior player. He had temper tantrums that made John McEnroe look mild. If he lost a match he would cry and pout for a while afterwards. Roger made a conscious decision to change his ways and become more Stoic.
This post by Allen Fox talks about how Roger handled choking by not panicking.
This post by Allen Fox talks about how Roger handled choking by not panicking.
I should add that if there was anything to learn from this match it was that you can choke and still win as long as you don’t get rattled about it. And the topic of “courage” comes up when people think about choking. In my opinion, it doesn’t show courage to not be nervous and make the big shot on the big point. It takes courage to choke on the big point, not get upset about it; fight your way to another big point; and finally come through, either by making a good shot or your opponent missing.Fox's point can apply to other situations beyond sports. That it's OK to tighten up under pressure as long as you recognize it and keep trying to do your best.
Labels:
competition,
growth mindset,
resilience,
willpower
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)