2 ms·
Being an asshole isn't required to be successful. It's a nice think to think the world is "fair" like that, that anyone who is successful has to be an asshole (
by e40 13y ago
Being an asshole isn't required to be successful. It's a nice think to think the world is "fair" like that, that anyone who is successful has to be an asshole (or that smart people are ugly, or that successful people are unhappy, or whatever), but it isn't true from experience.
I think the conversation has changed. I never used the word "asshole" and didn't for a reason. I don't think Kkosla is an asshole, and I don't think anyone (at least, when I read the comments) was calling him one. Quite the opposite. It was a douchey move, but he's not an asshole. He is driven to win more than most people can imagine, and that plus his intelligence are two huge factors in his serial success.
I'm glad you've had a better experience than I. I really am. I know my sample is small, but I'd done a lot of reading over the years. Steve Jobs, for example, fits my profile to a t, along with the people I've had direct contact with. (The group I'm talking about can be assholes, and I think Steve Jobs was one. It's not required, though.)
Let me add an angle. I started a company almost 30 years ago. It's still going. We've been profitable almost every year, but not wildly so. If I were to give the name, most here would say it is not a successful company. I'm by no means rich. We have never missed a payroll in that 30 years. Not once. Yes, I've fired people. I've done layoffs. I've never done one thing that I can't live with at night when I go to sleep. None of my decisions keep me awake.
However, I was presented with many, many forks in the road. One road (the one I took) was a "good" one. The other would have allowed me to profit, sometimes much more than the other decision. I've watched very successful people over the years and I came to realize that they often take that more profitable road.
Because of the types of decisions we make, outsiders call us a "family" business. That is CEO-speak for we can't make the hard decisions needed to increase profits, often at the expense of the people that work for us. I've had long discussions with serially successful people, and their primary advice, stop being a family business, don't be friends with your employees and start squeezing everyone for productivity and profit. It's what potential investors and buyers want to see, they say.
So, my sample is relatively small, but I've talked with lots of potential investors, VCs and just plain successful people, and I've definitely seen a real pattern.
- update 13y ago> One road (the one I took) was a "good" one. The other would have allowed me to profit, sometimes much more than the other decision. Wouldn't it have been more beneficial to society, in the long run, if you'd maximized profits by making those hard decisions? In the end, that is, right now, you would be a powerhouse instead of a "family business," which would allow you greater positive influence on humanity
- coryfklein 13y agoOr, greater negative influence on humanity, if he gets there by exploitation.
- e40 13y agoIt's the road I wanted. I couldn't live with myself by doing those things with I feel would have been selfish. I'm not rich, but I'm not poor by any stretch. I've done well. And, to answer your question: no, society wouldn't be better off. It would be worse off, because those decisions would have caused other people distress while bring me more power or money.