Are you driven by success or failure?

[ttsbuck]

Nothing drives me to succeed more than previous success. Once you are successful at something that accomplishment becomes reality. You now know you can do it and you want to enjoy that satisfaction again. I feel the same whether its hunting, fishing, bowling, or any other sport or activity.

[Jackson Marsh]

I suspect Stanley is intrinsic and his friend is extrinsic.

That's where the difference is, not necessarily success or failure per say.

I don't agree. Maybe his friend, once successful to a level he hoped to achieve, is satisfied.
I don't think intrinsic neccessarily = failure driven or vise versa.

I know in my life once I succeed or feel I have mastered something I feel the need for a new challenge.

You may be assuming success/failure is the measure. It's not.

Stanley "puts a good buck on the wall and then wants to get another" = intrinsic statement
Friend when "successful becomes complacent and disinterested" = extrinsic statement.

Complacentcy is a major by-product of external motivators (it's not unique to it, but it's common). So is being bummed with success.

The friend is likely extrinsic because he reaches a "plateau" with a kill (being bummed) and slips back to the norm before needing the external motivation again to succeed. It's not the failure that's the motivator; its the external conditions that failure brings with it.

Another good sports example is Randy Moss (external) vs. Jerry Rice (internal).

*Edit I should say that the majority of people on earth are extrinsic. I don't recall the exact numbers, but somewhere around 70-30 is the ratio. I also should state that when I say extrinsic, that means they display extrinsic behavior and tendancies more so than intrinsic. People are not purely one or the other, but 99.99%+ people display one much more than the other (making two camps essentially), if that makes sense.

Interesting stuff Phade!

If I had to bet, I would guess most people think they are Intrinsically motivated..........
.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Buckfever]

I think it's an interesting topic, but I would be more interested in really getting to the core of why Stanley's friend feels the way he does. Maybe it's not even related to motivation. Maybe he just doesn't want to be greedy. Maybe it's religious or philosophical. Maybe it's temperance. Used to be a virtue.

[Southern Man]

I think both sucess and failure motivates me, but sucess and failure are not the major drives why I do what I do.

Certianly I would rather have more sucess on my side rather than failure but failure doesn't hamper me to go at it the following year.

[phade]

I suspect Stanley is intrinsic and his friend is extrinsic.

That's where the difference is, not necessarily success or failure per say.

I don't agree. Maybe his friend, once successful to a level he hoped to achieve, is satisfied.
I don't think intrinsic neccessarily = failure driven or vise versa.

I know in my life once I succeed or feel I have mastered something I feel the need for a new challenge.

You may be assuming success/failure is the measure. It's not.

Stanley "puts a good buck on the wall and then wants to get another" = intrinsic statement
Friend when "successful becomes complacent and disinterested" = extrinsic statement.

Complacentcy is a major by-product of external motivators (it's not unique to it, but it's common). So is being bummed with success.

The friend is likely extrinsic because he reaches a "plateau" with a kill (being bummed) and slips back to the norm before needing the external motivation again to succeed. It's not the failure that's the motivator; its the external conditions that failure brings with it.

Another good sports example is Randy Moss (external) vs. Jerry Rice (internal).

*Edit I should say that the majority of people on earth are extrinsic. I don't recall the exact numbers, but somewhere around 70-30 is the ratio. I also should state that when I say extrinsic, that means they display extrinsic behavior and tendancies more so than intrinsic. People are not purely one or the other, but 99.99%+ people display one much more than the other (making two camps essentially), if that makes sense.

Interesting stuff Phade!

If I had to bet, I would guess most people think they are Intrinsically motivated..........
.

[ Post made via Android ]

It really can be, and you're right - most people liken themselves to intrinsicly-driven, but in reality, most are extrinsic. It almost harkens to the Pareto principle - 80% of the resources/effort should be poured into the 20% of employees - 80% of sales comes from 20% of the clients - 80% of your time scouting and 20% of your time hunting.

The topic gets even more interesting when you start to really dive into elite talent, drive, and ego - even in a hunting perspective. The other characteristic, besides ego, that is practically a necessity, is vision (not the eyeballs, but the ability to lay a map for the future). Building a vision is something approximately less than 5% of people can do, and institutions such as Harvard have shown that its something that people either have or don't, and its not something they can develop/learn. They can only learn how to use it effectively, if they do have it. You see this in CEOs (esp in tech) and in the hunting world.

Steve Jobs is a good example. So is Zuckerberg and the Google founders. Non-tech examples would be Jack Welch, Sam Walton, Henry Ford, and Walt Disney.

In the hunting "industry" a good example is Bill Jordan. I don't necessarily support him one way or the other, but his vision changed the industry's path toward more development, more products, etc. (Some people may feel this is bad, but he revolutionized the industry, however).

Andrae is a good example of a hunter with vision capabilities. Dare I say he also has an ego (not a bad thing when taken into an objective context).

[Southern Man]

It almost harkens to the Pareto principle - 80% of the resources/effort should be poured into the 20% of employees - 80% of sales comes from 20% of the clients - 80% of your time scouting and 20% of your time hunting.

The vital few and the trivial many. I've seen it many many times. It's everywhere.

[phade]

This site and its members are also a great example. Most of the member posts in this thread show intrinsic characteristics - initially appearing against the so called grain of norms.

But, looking further, you can also deduce that the average genetic make-up of members here are above average/more successful than the typical hunter in terms of learning, meeting goals/challenges, etc. This is partially evidenced by the annual member buck harvest thread. Pound for pound that thread alone would outshine any other online forum's thread.

I mean this in a humble fashion, but this site's members are the 20%. Not the 80%.

[Buckfever]

This site and its members are also a great example. Most of the member posts in this thread show intrinsic characteristics - initially appearing against the so called grain of norms.

But, looking further, you can also deduce that the average genetic make-up of members here are above average/more successful than the typical hunter in terms of learning, meeting goals/challenges, etc. This is partially evidenced by the annual member buck harvest thread. Pound for pound that thread alone would outshine any other online forum's thread.

I mean this in a humble fashion, but this site's members are the 20%. Not the 80%.

I think most of us would be insulted by the 20%.

[dan]

Andrae is a good example of a hunter with vision capabilities. Dare I say he also has an ego (not a bad thing when taken into an objective context).

I thought of Andrae immeadiatly with both your ego and you vision statements...

[Buckfever]

Hey Stanley do you think you could get your friend to join the discussion?

[PK_]

phade

Did you read 'Drive'- Daniel H. Pink?

Anyhow, you are an insightful dude.


Not sure which motivates me more. I always try to learn from success or failure ('Failing Forward')...

I think that past failure motivates me to learn what I did wrong, and later success 'validates' what I think I learned and motivates me to continue to improve. I don't let success or failure in any area of my life define me, I try to live a life of progression. Everything has it's ebbs and flows and the law of averages will work it all out in the end, so I try to never get too high or too low.

[Jackson Marsh]

80/20 business is interesting. I've always told my daughters that you can learn a lot by watching others (the majority) and basically doing the exact opposite. Examples: When everyone you know was upgrading to a bigger better house, maybe it is a good time to paydown the morgage, instead of going farther into debt.

When everyone is saying it is a GREAT time to be in stocks, it might be a great time to run like heck.

I guess I am a contrarion.


Just like this site

[ Post made via Android ]

[Stanley]

Hey Stanley do you think you could get your friend to join the discussion?

He is not a member. Not a forum guy.

[Buckfever]

Hey Stanley do you think you could get your friend to join the discussion?

He is not a member. Not a forum guy.

Maybe parse it with him and report back?

[lungbuster]

Neither success nor failure motivates me in the woods...............The hope of new experiences is what gets me out there, sure I think about succeeding when I am there and if I fail I try to figure out why and chose a different course the next time out.......But I don't rely on succeeding or failing to get me out of bed at 0'dark thirty for days on end, I rely on the fact that I may have an experience I have not encountered before, good or bad it is all a learning experience.