The models whose success we admire are, by definition, those who have succeeded

The famous founder wakes at four, eats one almond and writes goals in green ink. This is reported as a method. The thousands of failed founders who also abused almonds are unavailable for interview, so the habit inherits the glow of the surviving company.

That is how luck acquires a biography. A viral campaign’s strangest decision becomes its secret ingredient. A surviving investment fund’s concentrated bets look brave after equally concentrated failures have closed and vanished from comparison. The visible models were selected by the very outcome their behaviour is later asked to explain.

Role models can still make possibility concrete and expose a decision process worth examining. Biography becomes dangerous when admiration promotes it into evidence. The habit may have helped, done nothing or imposed a cost that some other advantage could afford. Similar starting resources, timing and constraints produce a far uglier comparison group: ordinary successes, survivable mediocrity and failures with no speaking fee. Some copied the same ritual faithfully. Others ignored it and prospered. In that company, the heroic routine often looks less magical and the boring structural advantage looks much larger.

The mechanism remains interesting after the mythology is removed. If it appears across winners and losers alike, it explains very little. If it changes outcomes under comparable conditions, it has earned attention. Green ink can await further evidence.

Behavioural principles

Behavioural ideas at play in this post

Short, plain-English explanations of the principles behind this post, with links to related books and examples in the archive.