You can look at life as a search for that one big winning hand, or you can look at life as a series of hands well played. If you believe life comes down to a single hand, of course, you can easily lose. But if you see life as a series of hands, and if you play each hand the best you can, thereâs a huge compounding effect. Bad luck can kill you, but good luck cannot make you great. As long as you donât get a catastrophic stroke of bad luck that flat-out ends the game, what really matters is how well you play each hand over the long haul.
Related Quotes
We defined a âluck eventâ as one that meets three tests: First, you didnât cause it; second, it has a significant potential consequence, good or bad; and third, it has an element of surprise, some aspect of the event is unpredictable before it happens. Using this definition, the evidence showed a lot of luck in the history of these companies. Butâ and this is the crucial pointâwe also found comparable amounts of luck in the control set of comparison cases we studied! The big winners did not generally get more good luck, less bad luck, bigger spikes of luck, or better-timed luck than their comparisons. What the best achieved, instead, was a higher return on luck. Hansen and I learned that the question is not whether youâll get luck along the wayâyou certainly will get luck, both good luck and bad. The critical question is what you do with the luck that you get. Iâve come to believe that about 50 percent of great leadership is what you do with the unexpected.
Those who see life, business, and the pursuit of accomplishment as about finding that one big hitâthe one big lucky breakâfail to grasp how true greatness happens. No great company, no great career, no great body of work comes about by a single event, a single flip of the coin, a single hand played. Of course, persistence doesnât guarantee success; and the best leaders understand that they may need to change strategies, plans, and methods on the long path to building a great company. But they also understand and live out this simple truth: Luck favors the persistent.
(Again, to review from the previous chapter, a âluck eventâ meets three tests: First, you didnât cause it; second, it has a significant potential consequence, good or bad; and third, it has an element of surprise, some aspect of the event is unpredictable before it happens.) Any framework that didnât account for unpredictable and unforeseen events would be incomplete, and I couldnât be intellectually satisfied until we wrestled with the question of luck. The concept of return on luck accounts for the undeniable fact that luck happens (a lot) yet captures the essential truth that luck itself cannot cause greatness. Catastrophic bad luck can kill a potentially great company, but good luck cannot make a company great. Luck doesnât build great companies that last; people do.
Lots of companies try to win and still canât do it. So imagine, then, the likelihood of winning without explicitly setting out to do so. When a company sets out to participate, rather than win, it will inevitably fail to make the tough choices and the significant investments that would make winning even a remote possibility. A too-modest aspiration is far more dangerous than a too-lofty one. Too many companies eventually die a death of modest aspirations.
In particular, you should avoid three pitfalls when thinking about where to play. The first is to refuse to choose, attempting to play in every field all at once. The second is to attempt to buy your way out of an inherited and unattractive choice. The third is to accept a current choice as inevitable or unchangeable. Giving in to any one of these temptations leads to weak strategic choices and, often, to failure.