The Winner Effect
The Neuroscience of Success and Failure
Ian Robertson is one of the world’s preeminent neuropsychologists. He’s both a clinical psychologist AND a neuroscientist—which is a rare combination. In this book, he walks us through “The Neuroscience of Success and Failure.” It's a fascinating reading. Big Ideas we explore include (Genetic Fatalism (the curse of), Goldilocks Goals (and how to get our goals juuuuuuust right), The Winner Effect (fish, mice, Mike Tyson and you), Oscar Winners (plus their cookie jars and highlight reels), and True Winners (the noble use of power).
Big Ideas
- The Curse of Genetic FatalismThe curse of.
- Goldilocks GoalsJuuuuuuust right.
- The Winner Effect: Fish + Mice + Mike Tyson + YouFish, mice, Mike Tyson and you.
- Oscars, Cookie Jars and Highlight ReelsCookie jars and highlight reels.
- True WinnersThe noble use of power.
“What makes a winner? …
Why do some people have an enormous drive to win, while others shy away from success and power? What does power do to people—and what about powerlessness? Do success and power make you live longer and better—and if so, why? Is power really an aphrodisiac and if it is, how and why does it have this effect?
The question of winning underpins almost every part of our lives. Who wins is the factor that shapes our lives more completely than anything else. Winning is a drive as powerful as sex, and we all want to win, whether we are aware of it or not. Think of the ambitions swirling around the desks of any office; consider the emotions and skirmishes surrounding promotion and advancement. In its more naked form, look at the parents howling at the sidelines of the football pitch for the victory of their seven-year-old darlings. What are they shouting for? Winning. And they want it very, very badly. Why do we want to win so badly, and what makes a winner?
That is the question that I aim to answer in this book.”
~ Ian Robertson from The Winner Effect
This is our second Note on one of Ian Robertson’s books.
I basically read them both back to back. Well, technically, I read his most recent book (The Stress Test) then ordered this one then read The Genius in All of Us by David Shenk while I waited for Amazon to deliver this one then read it the day I got it. It was a good week. :)
As we discussed in our other Notes, Ian is one of the world’s preeminent neuropsychologists. He’s both a clinical psychologist AND a neuroscientist—which is a rare combination.
In The Stress Test he walks us through the neuroscience of “How Pressure Can Make You Stronger and Sharper.” In this book, he walks us through “The Neuroscience of Success and Failure.” They’re both FASCINATING reads. (Get a copy of this one here.)
Before we jump in, I want to make one thing REALLY CLEAR.
If we want to “win” in life—in every sense of that word—we need to KNOW (!) that it ALL starts with our beliefs about ourselves. The most important core belief? We need to KNOW (!!!) that, with effort and perseverance, we CAN get smarter, healthier and happier.
In the first chapter, Ian leans heavily on Carol Dweck’s research. We’ve talked about her wisdom many times and have Notes on two of her books: Self-Theories and Mindset. As I read this book, I was reminded of JUST how essential her wisdom is.
So… If you haven’t read and absorbed and started practicing the wisdom from those Notes yet (for yourself AND for your kids/family/colleagues/clients/etc.), I HIGHLY recommend you get on that.
Note: This is PhilosophersNote #603. I’m pretty sure I’ve never used an Introductory blurb to make a point like that. So… Yah. I feel strongly about it. :)
With that, let’s jump in. This book is packed with Big Ideas and I’m excited to share some of my favorites to help you WIN TODAY.
Download MP3
Download PDFAchievement motivation, then, is a crucial ingredient for success in life, and part of the recipe for what makes a winner.
Get the BookThe Curse of Genetic Fatalism
“The sequencing of the human genome has accelerated the spread of a core belief of our time—that much of what we are and do is coded in our genes; it is a form of biological predestination. Most geneticists are cautious about claims made about the extent to which complex behaviours and personal characteristics are determined by genes. There are only 20-30,000 of the things, and that is an impossibly small number to control all the glorious manifestations of human behaviour. And we evolved genetically in order to learn from the environment, so wise geneticists will make the case for nature with nurture, rather than for nature versus nurture.
But there are psychologists and psychiatrists who, for many different reasons, choose to greatly exaggerate how things like psychological problems, personality and intelligence are influenced by genes. Yes, there are genetic contributions to many of these, but in very few of them are genes the only or even main determining factor. But the problem with believing that genes call the shots where intelligence, personality and psychological problems are concerned, is that it leaves you, as the human actor in this drama, helpless. There is nothing you can do about the genes, but if you choose to believe eminent academics that your behaviour is largely genetically determined, then that belief is likely to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
That’s from Chapter 1 in which we take a fascinating biographical stroll through the lives of Pablo Picasso’s son and J. Paul Getty’s children and grandchildren.
This is also where we go DEEP into Carol Dweck’s research on the importance of having the CORE BELIEF that you CAN get better through hard work and persistence.
Before you run off to study Carol’s work, let’s revisit the whole “nature vs. nurture” conversation. As it turns out, this was the primary theme of the book I read in between Ian’s two books.
In The Genius in All of Us, David Shenk tells us: “Individual differences in talent and intelligence are not predetermined by genes; they develop over time. Genetic differences do play an important role, but genes do not determine complex traits on their own. Rather, genes and the environment interact with each other in a dynamic process that we can never fully control, but that we can strongly influence. No two people will ever have exactly the same potential, but very few of us actually come to know our own true limits. Speaking broadly, limitations in achievement are not due to inadequate genetic assets, but to our inability, so far, to tap into what we already have.”
Again: Why does it matter?
Because, if we take an “I’m just the way I am because of my genes!” approach to ANY area of our lives (whether that’s our intelligence or our physical or psychological health), we will feel helpless and won’t take the action we COULD have taken—and that negative belief can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Which brings us back to Carol Dweck. Ian walks us through some of her fascinating research that shows us how quickly a kid (and an adult!) can fall into a “fixed” or helpless mindset.
Check out our Notes onSelf-TheoriesandMindset for the details on the studies.
For now, know this: “Whatever we do, we should not praise a child for being ‘bright,’ but rather for their effort, perseverance or ingenuity, otherwise we risk imposing the curse of genetic fatalism on them.”
One more time: Why does all this matter?
Because winning (in every sense of the word) always begins with the belief that we can.
Goldilocks Goals
“The eminent Harvard psychologist David McClelland studied the drive to achieve over many decades and discovered that the people who achieved most—the winners, in other words—tended to be those who, like Goldilocks, didn’t like their porridge either too hot or too cold. The people who actually ended up achieving the most tended to set moderately challenging targets for themselves: that is, demanding but attainable. Underachievement is almost inevitable if you set your sights so low that you don’t expect to win. But setting them too high … can have similarly disabling effects.”
That passage is also from Chapter #1.
As we discussed, we need to believe we can win if we want to have a shot at winning. And… David tells us that, as with ALL things, too much of a good thing is NOT a good thing.
Remember our Inverted U? Let’s apply that to the targets we’re setting for ourselves and remember: “Underachievement is almost inevitable if you set your sights so low that you don’t expect to win. But setting them too high … can have similarly disabling effects.”
Quick check-in: How are YOUR goals?
Let’s stretch but not snap as we line up and knock over our next domino. TODAY.
The Winner Effect: Fish + Mice + Mike Tyson + You
“Landau’s mathematically derived prediction of the existence of a ‘winner effect’ came to glossy realisation amid the sparkling neon of Las Vegas. Had scientific evidence caught up with Professor Landau’s mathematics?
It had, but it took seventeen years form Landau’s post-war studies before Arthur McDonald of the University of South Dakota tested Landau’s hypothesis by studying the behaviour of the notoriously aggressive green sunfish. First he watched carefully a group of these fish for three days and worked out which were the dominant and which the submissive fish on the basis of their various interactions with one another. He then divided the dominant fish into three groups: one went into isolation for five days, while another group was put into a tank with a larger fish and the final set were put in with smaller fish.
After five days the fish were put back into their original tank and their attack behaviour studied. And just as Landau had predicted, the dominant fish who had spent five days with the bigger fish were much less likely to attack and beat fish than before their stressful ‘loser’ experience. Their friends who had been with smaller fish, on the other hand, came back into the real fish world fired up and aggressive, more dominant than before.
This is pretty much what Don King had arranged for Mike Tyson—McNeeley and Mathis were the small fish used to boost Tyson’s winner effect and help him win back his world title. Landau was indeed right. And many other experimenters followed with other species. A typical experiment put pairs of male mice into the mouse equivalent of the boxing ring, and the researchers rigged an otherwise equal contest by slipping a little sedative into one of the animal’s pre-match food. Unsurprisingly, the non-sedated competitor would win but the consequences of this rigged match only emerged in the next bout. When the rigged-match winners were now pitted against a tough, unsedated and hard-eyed opponent, they were more likely to win the real fight than if they had not had the previous victory experience against the sedated mouse.”
The Winner Effect.
It was discovered in 1950 by Professor H. G. Landau, a biologist who studied the mathematics of hierarchy. Among other things, he discovered that “winning a challenge with another animals boosts your chances of winning the next encounter.”
That mathematical discovery was proven in the studies like the ones involving the fish and mice discussed above. It’s also demonstrated in the story Ian shares about Mike Tyson regaining his heavyweight title (after spending a few years in prison) by first racking up a couple of easy wins against inferior opponents (known in the boxing world as “tomato cans”).
Ian walks us through a fascinating array of studies that highlight various facets of the winner effect—touching on Ideas we discuss in our Notes on Presence and The As If Principle.
For example, holding a pencil with your lips will lead to a slightly lower mood than holding it with your teeth as one induces a bit of a frown while the other induces a bit of a smile.
And, he talks about the early studies Amy Cuddy talks about in Presence. Striking expansive “power” poses leads to both feelings of more power AND slight changes in testosterone and cortisol than assuming more contracting, weaker poses.
Even holding your hand in a fist (a universal symbol of power and dominance) will make you feel stronger than holding it like scissors. (Crazy but true. Try it. lol)
What he didn’t talk about that I find particularly interesting for our day-to-day Optimizing purposes is the connection between “small wins” and Teresa Amabile’s research we discuss in our Notes on The Progress Principle.
Mash her wisdom up with the power of creating tiny wins via Mini Habits and we have some intriguing ways to leverage the winner effect in our daily lives as we aggregate and compound all these tiny little Marginal Gains into bigger and bigger domino wins! To be discussed more… :)
For now, how can you create some little wins in YOUR life TODAY?!
That sense in people with a high need to achieve of being almost physically impelled to succeed is not an illusion, then: the more driven by ambition we are, the greater the level of neural activity that will be fired up deep in the brain. And the critical aspect of this drive is that it comes from inside, from intrinsic motivation; it is not triggered only by external motivations.
Oscars, Cookie Jars and Highlight Reels
“The biggest day-to-day stress for us humans is the threat to the self. For most celebrity actors, only as good as their last movie, the self is under constant evaluation, repeated threat. The same is true for international scientists, only as good as their last paper, their past achievements having set the bar at heights they have to exceed again and again. Or the salesperson, only as good as the last contract landed. After all, people do not compare the director’s new movie, the scientist’s new scientific paper or the businessman’s latest deal with his average achievement. They compare it with the most easily remembered previous movie/paper/deal—which is usually the best one.
And that is the proposed solution to the mystery of the Oscars—winning an Oscar may offer a powerful and near-everlasting ‘safety signal for self’—a sort of lifelong insurance policy that protects ‘me’ against the terrible stress of other people’s negative evaluations. Winning an Oscar may be one lifelong ‘all clear’ air-raid siren—a permanent safety signal that your self is secure. That is perhaps why winning an Oscar makes you live so much longer—by protecting your self, it defends your body.”
That’s from a fascinating chapter called “The Mystery of the Oscars” in which we explore the question: “Why do we want to win?”
(Note: Each of the core chapters answers a different question—starting with “Are we born to win?” then moving on to “Is winning a matter of chance and circumstances?” then “What does power do to us?” and concluding with “Does winning have a downside?”
Short answers are: No. No. A lot. And, Yes. :)
So… The chapter about the Mystery of the Oscars is all about solving the riddle of why Oscar winners live, on average, an ASTONISHING “four years longer than, by all other measures, equally successful Oscar nominees.”
(btw: Four years is a long time. “In fact if such a four-year improvement in life expectancy were extrapolated to the whole population it would be equivalent to the result of curing all cancers.”)
As Ian walked us through the importance of protecting our sense of self, I thought of Navy SEAL David Goggins and his Oscar-like cookie jar. I also thought of my Yoda, Phil Stutz—who happens to coach a number of Hollywood’s elite including a bunch of Oscar-winning actors.
First, Goggins.
In Can’t Hurt Me he tells us that he has a “cookie jar” of past success he can go to whenever he needs some fuel. He puts it this way: “That’s one reason I invented the Cookie Jar. We must create a system that constantly reminds us who … we are when we are at our best, because life is not going to pick us up when we fall. There will be forks in the road … mountains to climb, and we are only capable of living up to the image we create for ourselves.”
Note: He ALSO tells us that we need to discipline ourselves to BRING OUR BEST when we FEEL THE WORST.
He tells us: “Remember, visualization will never compensate for the work undone. You cannot visualize lies. All the strategies I employ to answer the simple questions and win the mind game are effective because I put in work. It’s a lot more than mind over matter. It takes relentless self-discipline to schedule suffering into your day, every day, but if you do, you’ll find that at the other end of that suffering is a whole other life just waiting for you.”
That’s a good one-two punch for antifragile confidence. Start by showing up and EARNING your own trust by doing what needs to get done whether you feel like it or not. Then, make sure you’ve got your cookie jar of you at your best filled up so you can get fueled by those past successes when you really need it.
Phil Stutz says basically the exact same thing. He tells us that we need to have a “highlight reel” of past successes ready at hand that we can put on repeat when we’re feeling self-doubt. And, as we’ve discussed countless times, he tells us that we need to cultivate our emotional stamina. Remember: “The worse I feel, the more committed I am to the protocol.”
He and I actually chatted about this Idea in our Coaching session yesterday afternoon. I read him part of the blurb and asked him what he thought. He told me he agreed but then said the real challenge is: “How do you have the Oscar without having the Oscar?”
The true winner, he says, is not dependent on any outer event or object to feel like a winner. The metrics we measure ourselves against must be within our control. Ultimately, we’re competing against ourselves and we’re fiercely committed to embodying courage and love.
THAT’s what true winning is all about. Which leads us to the next and final Idea…
True Winners
“What makes a real winner then—as opposed to a Karen or a Robert Mugabe, whose distorted brains believe themselves to have won? Real winners enjoy the benefits of power—the testosterone-fuelled drive, smartness, creativity and goal-focus—and enjoy influencing other people by dispensing resources that other people need and want. They thrive on being able to have an impact and they do not cripple themselves by believing their success to be due to inherited, unchangeable qualities—intuitively winners know that the greatest obstacles to success can be self-handicapping beliefs such as ‘I can’t do that because I’m not bright, outgoing, ambitious, tough [add any other adjectives you care to] enough.’
Winners are to a considerable extent made by their circumstances and environments—most of us can become winners by rising to a challenge and we can get better if we are put into a position of power and influence. But sometimes we don’t benefit from such circumstances because of unconscious prejudices and stereotypes in our own and others’ brains. Leaders must have an appetite for power—the stress will be too great if they don’t—but the hunger has to be as much for power for the benefit of others—s power—as for the sustenance of the ego—p power. Power-hungry national leaders go to war more often, so we must carefully judge what sort of power need they have: true winners seek power as much for the social, s as they do the ego p.
Winners feel in control of life, and that sense of control will help shield them from stress and help them succeed better and live longer and happier. But true winners appreciate that, no matter how much of a chimera it is, the ego is a dangerous dog. The men and women who take on the burden of power and use it well always keep the dog at a certain distance and on a tight leash of accountability to principles beyond themselves. Taming ‘I’ may be the greatest challenge for mankind’s success.”
Those are the final words of the final chapter called “The Winning Mind.”
Throughout the book, Ian walks us through the various facets of winning and power—both the positive AND the negative. He tells us we need to get better (both as individuals and as a society) in running what he calls “power audits” to make sure those in power are exercising that power in the most healthy way possible. (Of course, that applies to us in our various roles (parents, bosses, leaders, etc.) and to global leaders in elected and other powerful positions.)
He also tells us about “p power” and “s power” and how we need to balance our egoic/personal need for power with a more social, altruistic desire to lead and have an impact.
Creating a strong yet grounded and disciplined (and “tamed”) “I” is certainly one of the greatest challenges for mankind’s success. Of course, helping us meet that challenge is what our work together is all about.
So… Here’s to being the change and changing the world—one person at a time, starting with you and me as we operationalize virtue and live with more Wisdom + Self-Mastery + Courage + Love + Hope + Gratitude + Curiosity + Zest TODAY!
About the author
