I need to read other comments and comment properly tomorrow. But GREAT post. Ive been learning a lot about mental health "disorders" and there is probably a post coming about it because, I disagree with the labelling of them and the diagnosing of them.
But here's part of what annoyed me in my content this week which is relatable to your topic of expectations.
"Personality disorders: A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience, and behaviour that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individuals culture, is pervasive, inflexible, has onset in adolescence or early adulthood, is stable over time and leads to distress and impairment".
Expectations by who? And what? And why!? From my learnings "personality disorders" are a result from childhood abuse/maltreatment, trauma/past experiences..... someone who has lived through adversity and to put the icing on the cake, we give them the label of borderline personality disorder due to their maladaptive behaviour. *rant over*
Thanks Clare and I think labels are helpful sometimes because they can provide validation for people who are experiencing difficulties, which enables them to better understand and address their challenges. But they can also prevent us from growing long term, because our brain gets used to saying "I can't do that because I have X". What do you think?
I agree and it's the very reason I don't like them. In my experience with people, they have held people back more than helped them grow and learn. Like you said, the label is often used as an excuse for why they can't do things or it's used as an excuse for why they do. I do it because I have X. I don't do that because of X. It might be something to manage, but it isn't who you are.
I asked Reuben Thorne once, while he was All Black captain and copping heaps of unfair sh*t about how he was 'handling' it and he said he wasn't. Not because he wasn't aware of it but to him it was always about the next job. Not what the media were saying, nor the critics, it was just about what was the best thing for the team. Is why he is so widely admired and probably the most underrated leader of the pro Era given he lead a crusaders team in 2002 that is still the only side to have won every game of a full super rugby season and then, a year later, led the All Black side which reclaimed the Bledisloe after a 5 year absence. And in true Reuben style, his next 'job' was to ask me how I was doing given I was All Black media manager and was having to deal directly with all the critics! I learnt a lot that day from a bloke whom I don't think ever realized just how much he inspired others around him just by being himself, living in the moment and focusing on the next job!
I don't mind labelling something as a failure - I agree with Shaq on this one.
The Bucks were highly rated and were aiming for the championship, they didn't get it - so it's a failure. A team that was rebuilding would aim a lot lower, and not winning the championship wouldn't mean failure - they'd be going for other goals.
*However*
Just because something is a failure doesn't mean we shouldn't learn from it and get better for next time. Failing to meet an objective doesn't mean you didn't gain *anything* - it's just that you didn't meet the main target.
I think the problem occurs when we say "I failed, therefore I am a failure".
Better to say "I failed at that, but here are the lessons I took out of it and here's what I'm doing for next time."
Earlier in my career I was in consulting and led one particular project that led me to burnout. I would say the outcome of the project was a failure - it didn't have the impact the client wanted and I felt like crap the entire way.
I learned several great things during that process:
1. It was time to leave consulting
2. I wasn't motivated by the things I was working on - and I had a better idea of what did motivate me (which eventually led to career change etc)
3. Certain people are snakes and you gotta watch out for them :)
That's my take. I don't mind calling it a failure - just don't apply that to people.
"I think the problem occurs when we say "I failed, therefore I am a failure"" - totally agree this is the real problem, and a very easy trap for people who look at failure this way to fall in to.
Yes the Bucks had the potential to win and didnt meet with others expected of them. But Giannis was injured so I think people expectations of them weren't realistic. After all, no team has won the NBA title with a key player injured since the early 80s (Kareem missed one game).
A lot has to go your way to win (working hard is a given), which is the point many people miss and beat themselves up because of it. Think we are on the same though!
Yep all good points and pretty much on the same page I reckon.
One thing I have noticed is a tendency to soften our language too much these days.
For example, don't say failure...say "steps to success" 😀
I recently came across a consultant in the leadership space who doesn't refer to "weaknesses" any more... only strengths. I think this is BS... weaknesses are good to acknowledge so you can reduce their impact as needed.
The trick is not to beat yourself up about them I reckon. But admitting you have them and not shying away from them is important.
Dunno so much as whether he looked up to him but definitely learnt off him, and Toddy before them. Different types of men, though he would never admit it, I think Rich grew to enjoy all of the off field attention (read worship!!) he received. Don't think Reub cared a jot for it. Both had something we never had though and that was a kick arse leadership group around them, probably the best the game has ever seen. A leader in any pursuit is only as good as the support he gets from his lieutenants, they are what makes him, and Rich in particular had that. While he gets all the credit, and was a great leader, he had leaders all around him. If he had been Wallaby captain and not All Black skipper during our time, I suspect he would have struggled.
I need to read other comments and comment properly tomorrow. But GREAT post. Ive been learning a lot about mental health "disorders" and there is probably a post coming about it because, I disagree with the labelling of them and the diagnosing of them.
But here's part of what annoyed me in my content this week which is relatable to your topic of expectations.
"Personality disorders: A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience, and behaviour that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individuals culture, is pervasive, inflexible, has onset in adolescence or early adulthood, is stable over time and leads to distress and impairment".
Expectations by who? And what? And why!? From my learnings "personality disorders" are a result from childhood abuse/maltreatment, trauma/past experiences..... someone who has lived through adversity and to put the icing on the cake, we give them the label of borderline personality disorder due to their maladaptive behaviour. *rant over*
In summary, expectation has a lot to answer for.
Thanks Clare and I think labels are helpful sometimes because they can provide validation for people who are experiencing difficulties, which enables them to better understand and address their challenges. But they can also prevent us from growing long term, because our brain gets used to saying "I can't do that because I have X". What do you think?
I agree and it's the very reason I don't like them. In my experience with people, they have held people back more than helped them grow and learn. Like you said, the label is often used as an excuse for why they can't do things or it's used as an excuse for why they do. I do it because I have X. I don't do that because of X. It might be something to manage, but it isn't who you are.
Agreed
I asked Reuben Thorne once, while he was All Black captain and copping heaps of unfair sh*t about how he was 'handling' it and he said he wasn't. Not because he wasn't aware of it but to him it was always about the next job. Not what the media were saying, nor the critics, it was just about what was the best thing for the team. Is why he is so widely admired and probably the most underrated leader of the pro Era given he lead a crusaders team in 2002 that is still the only side to have won every game of a full super rugby season and then, a year later, led the All Black side which reclaimed the Bledisloe after a 5 year absence. And in true Reuben style, his next 'job' was to ask me how I was doing given I was All Black media manager and was having to deal directly with all the critics! I learnt a lot that day from a bloke whom I don't think ever realized just how much he inspired others around him just by being himself, living in the moment and focusing on the next job!
Matty! Yes, I remember Reuben. Was he someone McCaw looked up to?
I don't mind labelling something as a failure - I agree with Shaq on this one.
The Bucks were highly rated and were aiming for the championship, they didn't get it - so it's a failure. A team that was rebuilding would aim a lot lower, and not winning the championship wouldn't mean failure - they'd be going for other goals.
*However*
Just because something is a failure doesn't mean we shouldn't learn from it and get better for next time. Failing to meet an objective doesn't mean you didn't gain *anything* - it's just that you didn't meet the main target.
I think the problem occurs when we say "I failed, therefore I am a failure".
Better to say "I failed at that, but here are the lessons I took out of it and here's what I'm doing for next time."
Earlier in my career I was in consulting and led one particular project that led me to burnout. I would say the outcome of the project was a failure - it didn't have the impact the client wanted and I felt like crap the entire way.
I learned several great things during that process:
1. It was time to leave consulting
2. I wasn't motivated by the things I was working on - and I had a better idea of what did motivate me (which eventually led to career change etc)
3. Certain people are snakes and you gotta watch out for them :)
That's my take. I don't mind calling it a failure - just don't apply that to people.
"I think the problem occurs when we say "I failed, therefore I am a failure"" - totally agree this is the real problem, and a very easy trap for people who look at failure this way to fall in to.
Yes the Bucks had the potential to win and didnt meet with others expected of them. But Giannis was injured so I think people expectations of them weren't realistic. After all, no team has won the NBA title with a key player injured since the early 80s (Kareem missed one game).
A lot has to go your way to win (working hard is a given), which is the point many people miss and beat themselves up because of it. Think we are on the same though!
Yep all good points and pretty much on the same page I reckon.
One thing I have noticed is a tendency to soften our language too much these days.
For example, don't say failure...say "steps to success" 😀
I recently came across a consultant in the leadership space who doesn't refer to "weaknesses" any more... only strengths. I think this is BS... weaknesses are good to acknowledge so you can reduce their impact as needed.
The trick is not to beat yourself up about them I reckon. But admitting you have them and not shying away from them is important.
Agreed but it’s a tricky balancing act for many people I reckon
That's true - self-esteem matters with this.
In my experience, having high self-esteem helps to embrace the "F" word (failure).
Not that I always had it! I struggled with confidence etc for many years, but at 43 I'm in a good spot thankfully :)
Dunno so much as whether he looked up to him but definitely learnt off him, and Toddy before them. Different types of men, though he would never admit it, I think Rich grew to enjoy all of the off field attention (read worship!!) he received. Don't think Reub cared a jot for it. Both had something we never had though and that was a kick arse leadership group around them, probably the best the game has ever seen. A leader in any pursuit is only as good as the support he gets from his lieutenants, they are what makes him, and Rich in particular had that. While he gets all the credit, and was a great leader, he had leaders all around him. If he had been Wallaby captain and not All Black skipper during our time, I suspect he would have struggled.