There is formula for changing people. Doctor Malik Mohammed shared this wisdom with the EO Global Leadership Academy last week in Washington, USA. If you are to change someone’s behaviour patterns, two things are necessary.
This video is about Building Trust – and how building Trust will Improve Relationships and the Enhance the Quality of our Lives. After you have food and shelter, it is the quality of the relationships that really make your life. Relationships are about trust. Where there is no trust, there is no relationship.
I’d love to hear your comments, thoughts, reflections and questions on this and the other educational videos on my channel.
I wrote a few years ago a longer post on The Trust Equation: https://conorneill.com/2011/11/17/trust/
How do you Increase Trust?
In order to Increase Trust =
- Increase Perception of Credibility or
- Increase Perception of Reliability or
- Increase Intimacy or
- Reduce Perception of Self-Orientation.
Ways to increase Perception of Credibility:
- Tell the truth.
- Don’t exaggerate.
- Avoid saying things that others may see as lies (eg “We’ll put our best people on it”)
- If you don’t know, say “I don’t know”. Quickly.
- If you don’t belong, don’t go.
- Do your homework.
- Care about the work.
Ways to increase Perception of Reliability:
- Make specific small commitments and deliver 100%.
- Send meeting materials in advance.
- Make sure meetings have clear goals, and that those goals are met.
- Use the words your listener would use.
- Review agendas for meetings.
- Re-confirm events 24 hours before.
Ways to Increase Intimacy:
- Ask insightful questions.
- Share first.
Ways to Reduce Perception of Self-Orientation:
- Ask questions.
- Listen and paraphrase without adding anything.
- Resist the need to fill silences.
- Focus on defining the problem, not guessing the solution.
- Say “I don’t know” if you don’t know.
- Take responsibility for failed communications (Say “I have failed to communicate clearly”, not “You don’t understand“)
- Think as if you were completely responsable for this person’s future success in all aspects that are important to the other person.
- Care about the work. If you don’t care about the work, it is inevitable that you will focus more on yourself. Low self orientation is all about intensity of your commitment to help your listener.
I was listening to the Very Bad Wizards podcast episode #97 on how we really change our minds. They discuss a manifesto for a new virtual country called Rationalia that was initially shared on social media by Neil Degrasse Tyson. Here’s a very good reflection from Neil on the controversy triggered by his suggestion.
In The Land of Rationalia
In Rationalia, all decisions are taken because scientific data is collected and the evidence supports the law. If you want to change a law, you suggest an experiment. If the experiment produces evidence that the new law improves the conditions of Rationalia, then the law is passed.
In this land, reason wins.
This is not a country that we are living in now.
This post is not going to get into the pros and cons of the nation of Rationalia.
How Do Politicians try to Change our Minds?
If I listen to political debate (Trump vs Hillary, UK Labour party, Brexit referendum) I do not hear rational arguments being put forward for a range of proposed policies.
I hear arguments that go to credibility (or Ethos, for those followers of Aristotle amongst you):
- “You can’t trust her”,
- “She doesn’t have the energy”,
- “It was just locker-room banter”,
- “He says it does not represent who he is, but I think we all know that it really does represent exactly who he is”
There is nothing here about policies. There is nothing here about the danger of the other’s flawed policies. There is only raising of my trustworthiness and decreasing of the other’s trustworthiness.
Why has Reason disappeared from political debate?
I understand this shift. I see three big reasons:
- People hold a wider range of beliefs
- more sources and types of data and
- more channels for experts to spread their views.
There has been such a broadening of accepted beliefs over the last half-century that there are few value systems that can be assumed to apply to the whole electorate. There are few symbols that represent the same value to the whole electorate. There are few bases for logical argument that starts from a widely held truth.
There is much more data, in many more forms (graphics, reports, video, analyst reports…), there are many more experts, there are many more sources for information. The experts come at us through new channels – online, cable, satellite, podcasts, blogs, facebook, twitter…
It is confusing.
What do we do when we are Confused?
In this environment we seek voices we can trust. (Check out The Trust Equation for an in-depth analysis of the 4 components of trust in relationships)
It is only a trusted voice that can open our eyes to a new perspective.
If you want to persuade someone, build a relationship. If there is no relationship, there is little chance of persuasion.
We only really change our minds when a trusted friend who knows us finally asks a question in a private conversation “Hey, why is that so important to you? What effect do you think it is having on your life? on those around you?…”
Who are your trusted friends? Who do you allow to have influence on you?
What is your painful problem to solve?
Sales is not about describing your product, your process or your friends. It is about explaining to the buyer a problem that they have, and giving them a glimpse of a world where that problem has gone away.
What would it feel like to live in a world where that problem has gone away? What would it feel like to have your boss think you are a top performer? What would it feel like to have your kids proud of you? What would it feel like to see your body looking fit? What would it feel like to take your t-shirt off at the beach with pride?
What is your painful problem to solve?
By the way, you don’t get to talk to someone about their problem until you have a relationship of trust with that person. You can’t just dive in and say “we’ll make your pain go away!”. You have to begin a relationship of trust.
The best first step? Generosity. What can you give this person that they need? Often, it is your undivided, non-judgemental listening to what they have to say. Make them feel like they truly exist for you.
Toastmasters is a wonderful organisation for anybody who wishes to improve their ability to speak with impact.
However, there is something that has often challenged me with the “best” toastmaster speeches. They are very clearly the work of someone who has worked very, very, very hard on the words, gestures and voice that they use to deliver the speech. The “best” toastmaster speeches verge on the theatric and sometimes leave behind a sense of a natural conversation. Toastmasters evaluations can focus on bringing attention to symbols of hard work on the art of public speaking – big gestures, long pauses, wide ranges of volume, tone and pace in voice.
I am reading Sims Wyeth‘s book “The Essentials of Persuasive Public Speaking” at the moment. One of his sections is called “Hide the Art”. It speaks about the need to hide your brilliance as a speaker.
Why hide the art? Why would you want to go to the effort to hide the work you have done on being a great speaker?
Sims refers to a number of great political orators of the Athenian state. They knew that if the people saw them as relaxed and natural, they would be more open to listen to their ideas. If the people saw how much they worked on their ability to speak, the people would be worried about being manipulated by them.
It is a paradox – being visibly “too good” makes you less likely to connect and persuade.
Hiding the art does not mean that you intentionally are a poor speaker. It means what Bruce Lee refers to as Natural Un-Naturalness (see final paragraphs of post).
“The natural instinct and control need to be combined in harmony – one to the extreme you become very unscientific, the other you become a mechanical man… no longer a human being – the ideal is unnatural naturalness, or natural unnaturalness… yin yang” Bruce Lee
The swan swims gracefully over the water of the pond – only the fish see how hard her little feet are paddling beneath the surface. This is the art of great speaking. The art is to go through theatrical and get back to looking authentic, human and natural.
Moving people to action requires that you go beyond the level of preparation that allows you to deliver an excellent performance and arrive at an ability to hold a peer-to-peer conversation with the audience.
The path to Natural must pass through Contrived
The path to natural unnaturalness must pass through “contrived unnaturalness” – you have to do the work to move through discomfort and expansion of your natural range as a speaker – and Toastmasters is the absolute best path. However, taking your message beyond toastmasters requires integrating the gestures, voice, words back into yourself so that the audience feels like you have not worked so hard. This way they trust the person and listen to the message, rather than are impressed by the person, but distrustful of the message.
Great artists mastered the basics over many, many years before they found the path back to what we might call “authentic” or natural.
I came across this paragraph in a blog post by sales professional Grant Cardone.
“No one buys a $57,000 watch to tell time. People buy things to solve problems. The cost of the item isn’t what matters. Once the buyer is able to see the problem the product solves, their decision becomes much easier to resolve. Get to the “why” and the sale will follow.” Grant Cardone (original article at Entrepreneur magazine)
How do you get someone to buy something that they do not need?
Just as nobody really buys a $57,000 watch to solve the problem of “what time is it”, nobody does an expensive MBA just because they want to know more about business. Nobody hires an expensive consultant just because they need to finish a simple project. Nobody hires an expensive coach just because they need help with discipline.
Cheap watches tell the time. Cheap MBAs teach you about business. Cheap consultants can get projects finished. Cheap coaches can help you with discipline.
A casio watch can be bought for €2.99. It tells the time as well as the $57,000 watch. Why are they different? The casio watch has 8 functions. The $57,000 watch tells the time, and the date. The casio watch allows me to change the time. The $57,000 watch requires a trained technician to move the clock forward an hour.
Why does someone pay the $56,997.01 difference (and get less functionality)?
There is something else we are buying when we buy.
“Bread and Water. Everything else is marketing.” Tony Anagor
I did an interview with Tony Anagor, one of the coaches who works with my Leadership Communications courses at IESE Business School. Tony said “Bread and water. Everything else is marketing.”
What did he mean?
Once I have food and shelter, I can survive. I don’t need anything else to survive. I want other things, but I don’t need them.
If I say “I need friends, I would die without my friends”: it is not literally true. I want friends. They make my life worth living. They add to my life. They are not needs in the way of food and shelter. I wouldn’t value highly a lonely life, without friends.
If I say “I need an iPad. All of my friends have an iPad.”: not true. I really, really want an iPad. However, the reason that I want it is the important thing for a salesman to find. Why do I so need an iPad?
I want it because it might remove the anguish of feeling left out. I want it because it might give me a sense of importance in having an “in-demand” item. I want it because I like playing with new technology. I want it because my friends are playing some online game and I am less connected because I am not involved.
6 Keys to Get Email Read
Here are 6 keys to engage the reader when you ask for some help via email:
- Indicate the social connection between sender and reader – where did you meet? who put you in contact? “We met at the Foundum Unplugged conference 2 weeks ago”
- Understand the readers perspective – what context (background information) does the reader need to take a decision/act upon the email? This is often best provided as a url link to supporting information so as to keep the email body short.
- Explain why the reader was specifically selected as a source of potential help. “I am contacting you because you have over 8 years of experience in the industry”
- Show that you have already made some effort to understand the domain before asking for help. “I have spoken to X and to Y, I have read Z book.”
- Keep it short. Many emails are much too long – the sender has no edit process before sending the “draft” email. (Here’s a nice email policy called three.sentenc.es)
- Clarify exactly what is wanted: No effort to clarify what you are asking for. ”Help” is too vague. What do you want the reader to do when they finish reading? “Meet next Monday”; “Call me to set up a site visit”; “Forward the email to John”.
What gets email read in your inbox?
What tips do you have?
I was watching the UK version of the TV show “The Apprentice” a few months ago. This particular week’s challenge was to sell caravan and camping equipment at a trade show.
Early on, there was a key decision to make: Which model of caravan would the team try to sell?
Now, this was a trade show where the typical attendee was 60 years old and the teams had this information. This was not a show directed to young people, nor was it an audience that would be represented by the word “innovative”. This was people looking for solid, reliable caravans.
The team lead, lets call him Joe, asked for advice from one of his team members, who I will call Tom. Now, Joe has already agreed with the rest of the team that they should choose a proven, well-priced model…
Joe: “So, Tom, what do you think? Should we go for the hip, modern campervan or the older, proven model?”
Tom: “I think we should go for the modern one.” (I am surprised at this advice)
Joe: “Really? I like it a lot more… but… are you sure it is right for this market?”
Tom: “I think we can manage it.”
Joe: “Right, ok… I’ll go with your advice.”
Skip forward to the end of the week… Joe is in the boardroom defending why his team did so incredibly poorly. It was clearly because he chose a caravan that would be impossible to sell to the actual audience of the trade show.
Tom was playing the game supremely. He was being friendly to Joe and acting the part of a loyal team member, whilst really setting Joe up for a fall.
We see the Manipulators for what they are
In real life this happens all the time, but it is very hard to see – because the manipulators like Tom are very good at the act, and we only see how they deal with us. We don’t see or hear what they are saying to others behind our backs.
Modern western society forces a dilemma onto its citizens: How do I maintain a good balance between good, long-term, trusting relationships and individual achievement. The achievement often has to come by me winning and another person losing.
Machiavelli first put down the principles of individual achievement over trusted relationships back in 1500s in his book The Prince.
TV Series such as The Apprentice, Survivor and Big Brother are exquisitely designed and edited to open a clear window for the viewers into the scheming, manipulative words and actions of the competitors. They can often go for weeks believing that Tom is a wonderful friend in the house, whilst the audience has known for weeks that Tom is playing the true friend to several others and manipulating the whole house.
It is addictive watching.
I think it is addictive, because deep down we all know the game.
At the end of every course I teach at IESE Business School, all participants give extensive feedback on their experience of the course, the facilities… and on my role as a teacher.
When the summarized feedback reaches me a couple of weeks later, I open the pdf in a state of nervous tension. I am preparing myself emotionally for the news contained in the report. If the report is positive, I start to relax and enjoy the feeling of professional competence.
However, the last few quotes on the report are always the “areas for improvement”. I get tense again, and start already to justify myself before I even start reading.
I love positive feedback. I hate “developmental” feedback. I pretend sometimes to appreciate it, but I resist it fiercely inside my mind.
I am pretty sure that I am not alone.
I rationally know that it is the developmental feedback that can most help me improve, but I find it very hard in the moment to accept it and work with it. I feel it as a personal attack, not as an objective opinion of a friendly student who wholeheartedly wishes to see the institution of IESE Business School improve with their advice.
What do you do to “accept” developmental feedback? Are there any things that have changed your willingness to be open to and even seek out developmental feedback?
I had an opportunity to give a talk at TEDx University of Navarra in April this year. The talk has just made its way up to YouTube.
Now over 500K views of this talk
If you had 1000€ and you could invest that money in someone’s future, who would you bet on? Is it yourself?
Here is a wonderful 1 page summary of the TEDx talk from @in.sight.out
|Thanks to Sara Navarro Cuesta for being the first to share:
||Thanks to IESE Business School for a widely-read tweet
Who would you bet on?
Imagine you had the two hundred people you know best in the world sat in this room and i gave you this deal:
you come, today, come up here to me, you give me a thousand euros and you give me a name, and for the rest of that person’s life I will pay you ten percent of everything they make, every month, month after month, month after month.
Who would you choose?
Imagine that. Here in the room, if you look around the faces you see in this room -some good faces to bet on in this room- but if you put the two hundred people you know best from school, from university, through family connections,… Who of all the people you know, will be the one person that you would put on my paper and bring to me? Who would you bet on? I was asked this question seven years ago. The man in the picture is Warren Buffett
Warren Buffett, at times the richest man in the world.
Warren Buffett doesn’t invent things;
Warren Buffett doesn’t sell things;
Warren Buffett doesn’t manage a company.
Warren Buffet takes one decision every day:
Would I bet on this person?
And the results would seem that he does this quite well. But seven years ago when he asked this question to a hundred and fifty MBAs. In my mind, three or four faces came to my mind…
Three or four faces…
And I hope as you’re thinking about this now
-Who would you bet on?- Some faces come to your mind. Some faces come to mind. People you know,
if you have this bet to make you choose them.
So let’s work a little bit on this.
If we’re gonna do this properly which we put together a process.
What criteria will you use in making this decision?
What criteria is your mind already using when it puts up a couple of faces in your mind’s eye?
What are you looking for when you see in someone the capacity have a massive impact in the world? I’m assuming you wanna do this bet well, because you do it well you can use that money for a lot of good causes.
What criteria would you use?
One idea -let’s go through some ideas- one idea: let’s get the two hundred people present in the room to bring their grades from school and university and we put them in order from the best to the worst grade and we choose number one.
The really scary thing is if I asked a group of twelve-year-olds they would laugh at the idea. Twelve-year-old already see the grades in school is not the criteria.
What are the criteria we’re using?
What about best friends? Patxi, I’ll choose you if you choose me! Best friends! Wonderful for friendship but a very dumb-way to take this decision.
What criteria would you use?
What criteria is your mind already using when it starts to put some ideas in your mind?
Who would you bet on?
So if grades from school isn’t it; best friends isn’t it; What would you use?
Now Warren Buffett takes this decision everyday, and Warren Buffett has three criteria.
But before I get into these three criteria of Warren Buffett
I wanna move to the world of psychology -I studied psychology- and to this day, from the beginning of psychology, there’s one test that above any other tests in life predicts future success on every measure: wealth, quality of relationships, grades in school, length of relationships, happiness, measured on every scale wether qualitated or quantitated
And the test is called the Marshmallow Test.
This here is a marshmallow.
The marshmallow test can be conducted on children three or four years old: the psychologist brings the child into the room and says “this is yours, this is yours to eat. I need to leave the room for a couple of minutes, when I come back if it’s still there you get two”.
And the psychologist leaves the room.
And the kid looks at the marshmallow: its his marshmallow! you can use it in any way you want.
So fifty percent eat the marshmallow; fifty percent don’t eat the marshmallow.
And the fifty percent that don’t eat the marshmallow go on to live lives that are qualitative and quantitatively better than the kids that do eat the marshmallow.
But you can go and look at this on Youtube.
You can go and see this experiment being carried out. And what is most illustrative is what the children do that don’t eat the marshmallow.
The kids that eat the marshmallow do something similar:
they stare at the marshmallow, they look at it.
The kids that don’t eat the marshmallow -can you imagine three-year-olds, four-year-olds? it’s kind of obvious- the kids that don’t eat the marshmallow: they put their head on their hands, they get up and stare at the wall, they look at their shoes.
Because at the age of three they’ve already realized how little power they have over themselves, over their own nature.
the diet fails in the supermarket, not at home. If I go to the supermarket and I buy chocolate, and that chocolate gets to my house, my willpower might get me through one day, it might be getting through the end of the week, it might get me to the end of the month, I might last a year…
But one day something bad will happen: I’ll come home tired my willpower will not be there and I will eat that chocolate.
The marshmallow test: the most powerful tool, on three or four-year-old children, to determine the quality of their lives the rest of their life.
Now, marshmallows don’t work on grown adults, so I wouldn’t recommend we use the marshmallow test to make your decision of who’d you bet on.
Let’s go back to Warren Buffett and his three criteria:
the three criteria of Warren Buffett.
And Warren Buffett makes this decision pretty damn well: sixty billion dollars of Net worth through deciding “would I bet on this person or not?”. And if you look at the structure of a lot of his deals he takes ten percent of all the future income of this person, of this team, of this company, on these three criteria.
The second criteria of Warren Buffett:
Energy is health and a bias to action:
healthy people, people who don’t get ill often, people when they get a cold there back to work tomorrow cuz they recover quick, they sleep well.
Bias to action: people have a tendency to take action over thinking about action.
Energy is about vitality and a bias to action.
The third criteria of Warren Buffett:
But not chess intelligence, not business school intelligence, not sitting in a room for four years designing a strategy intelligence.
He’s talking about adaptive intelligence: when you’re running down the street and a lamp post is coming towards you, adaptive intelligence is the intelligence to see the pattern, see the lamp post coming and change your course just enough but instead of taking it in the forehead you take the blow on the shoulder and you keep moving.
So number two: energy.
Number three: intelligence.
But without number one Warren Buffett and I would rather you were dumb and lazy.
Without number one you’ll be a danger to yourself.
Without number one you’ll be danger to your family and to society.
Number one, Warren Buffett’s number one criteria…
Number two is energy. Number three, intelligence. But without this those two are dangerous.
Number one is integrity.
But integrity is that you say no to most things.
Integrity is really about an alignment between what your calendar says you do and what you say you. And if you say yes to most requests, if you can’t think of the time you said no in the last day, in the last week, your life has been divided into thousands of little pieces and spread amongst the priorities of other people.
So to live an integral life, to live a life true to your own values means that you say no very often.
Integrity, energy and intelligence.
Do they seem like good criteria?
Do they seem like good criteria?
They worked for Warren Buffett… They seem like good criteria?
Did you use these criteria in taking this decision? in choosing the one person to own ten percent of all their future income?
These three seem like good criteria for me, I use them, I often use them.
They seem like good criteria. Now, there’s a person in this room that without paying me a thousand Euros, without doing anything different, without raising your hand, without moving, you owe more than ten percent: you own one hundred percent.
The person in this room that you don’t have to pay money, you don’t have to go to me, you don’t have to speak to anyone, and you will own one hundred percent of everything, month after month, after month.
So I very much hope that you each day work very hard to maximize integrity, maximize energy maximize intelligence.
Because if you bet on someone else for ten percent, I damn well hope, you put everything you can into maximizing these three in your own life.
And given that we got a few minutes, How about some tools?
I’ll leave you with some tools: one tool to maximize your intelligence, one tool to maximize your energy, one tool to maximize your integrity. And you can put these into action right now.
Intelligence: write stuff down.
If you write down ideas you’ve had today, if you write down people you’ve met, describe things that are going on, six months from now you won’t be the intelligence of one moment: you’ll be the accumulated intelligence of six months of ideas, six months of things written down, six months of people’s quotes.
When I was fourteen years old my biology teacher made us write down five minutes everyday, whatever we wanted. I remember day one. Pen touched paper: “This is stupid, What are we doing?”
Day two, again: “This is stupid. What are we doing?” Day three: “He’s still doing this!”
Day four: “Strange thing happened to me on the way to school today…”.
Day five: “My brother said something to me this morning…”.
I’ve written everyday of my life since I was fourteen years old. I know where I was every day of my life since I was fourteen: I know what I was thinking, I know what I felt like, I know who I was with.
Start writing down your life, it’s the most valuable resource you have: your own life. But so few people take the time to document it. Write your life down, describe the marshmallow.
Energy: high-performance athletes. I’ve spent a lot of time over the last five years interviewing the high-performance athletes of Spain: Josef Ajram, Kilian Jornet, Miquel Suñer.
Josef Ajram: ten times he’s competed in the Marathon des Sables. Two marathons a day, six days across the Sahara.
And Josef tells me: he finishes because he never thinks about more than fifteen minutes ahead. He runs for fifteen minutes he stops, has a drink, another fifteen minutes, another fifteen minutes, his mind never goes beyond fifteen minutes.
He says “anybody can run for fifteen minutes”.
He’s run the Marathon des Sables because he’s never, ever, let his mind see more than the next fifteen minutes.
Miquel Suñer swims open water, without a wetsuit, across the english channel. No wetsuit! Forty two thousand strokes to leave the english coast over to france.
Fourteen, fifteen-degree water; the cold seeping in with every stroke. How does he do it?
Because his mind is never further than stroke, stroke, breath; stroke, stroke, breath. Hour after hour, swimming, but he’s never allowing is mind to go anywhere beyond: stroke, stroke, breath.
With the marshmallow: deal with one marshmallow at a time, one marshmallow at a time.
What’s the next step? Do not let your mind jump forward and see the biggest thing. Alpine climbers see the next inch.
Ranulf Fiennes, oldest man from europe to climb Everest: failed three times; on his last attempt his wife said “Ranulf, climb it like the horses”.
He looked at her: “What you mean like the horses?”.
She’s an animal trainer: “A horse has no concept of the finish, a horse runs until it collapses. Climb everest one step at a time. Ask yourself one question: “can I take one more step?” “Yes!” take it. “No!” pause. “Yes!” take it, “Yes!” take it.
And on one of those steps he stood on the summit.
Energy: deal with next unit, one marshmallow at a time, one marshmallow at a time.
Integrity: Do you know how a child spells love?
How does a child spell love?
This world is full of good intention… But, the way you see if an executive really is behind an initiative you open their diary and you count the hours.
If you say your parents are important to you, open the diary and show me the hours.
The coherence between a diary and your values is where integrity begins.
And it’s kind of horrific when you start to count, when you start to look and start to become aware of where your time goes… So little of my time really goes to the things that I know and I mean to do. So often I slip off into facebook and what was supposed to be a minute, is an hour, and then lunch comes.
But those minutes, once you start to get the minutes dedicated things that matter…
And the truly important thing to remember about the marshmallow test is that there’s hundreds, and thousands, and millions of marshmallows in your life: hundreds of little decisions, minutes after minute, day after day that all sum up.
And success in life is not one massive good decision, not one marshmallow not eaten;
and failure, is not one marshmallow eaten, or one poor decision.
Failure is repeated bad decisions;
success, is repeated, consistent, good habits.
We so underestimate what we can achieve in a year and so overestimate what we can achieve in a day. A page a day and you have a book in a year: you’ll never write a book in one day.
But this time, once you started dedicate the time right, I had the privilege is spending a day with Kilian Jornet -probably Spain’s top athlete, ultra man- when I met him he just finished running the Lake Tahoe Rim Run: 288 kilometers, 19 kilometers of vertical ascent and he run it in 36 hours.
What the hell goes through a man’s mind as he runs for 36 hours?
But when he runs, do you know what the other competitors say about Kilian?
“He looks like he’s enjoying it”.
The other runners are suffering and they’re looking down:
Killian is running touching the leaves as he runs past, smelling the smell of the forest, feeling at the end of the track beneath his feet.
He runs for thirty six hours because he’s absolutely there, his mind is nowhere else but in the run, in the path, in the forests, feeling completely alive.
But when you do get your diary too much up to your values, getting your life one hundred percent present, and experiencing every little piece,is what took Killian to be #1 in the world in the hardest sport in the world.
So the lesson, rule #1 for success -and I brought a few for all of you to see if you can achieve it- the rule for success: when you have a marshmallow don’t stare at it.
The diet doesn’t fail because of weakness of will, the diet fails because the chocolate is there.
If you want to stop watching television take the batteries out of the remote.
If you want to do more exercise, put your running shoes next to the door.
It’s small, small changes…
And when I come back five years from now, and I ask: “Who did you bet on?
the answer that I want:
Yo mismo! (Spanish for myself)
When I come back ten years from now, the answer that I want is “Yo mismo!”
And twenty years from now, I want you to have written stuff down;
I want you have dealt with one step at a time;
I want you to make sure your diary aligns completely, you say “no” to the things that don’t fit with what’s important to you.
And twenty five years when I come back here I will look out on the most successful group of people, because they’ve lives their lives fully.
Who would you bet on?