Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Feed-back on TPM articles
Hello Lucio,
Awesome awesome article on Ray Dalio (I love this formulation, hope it's ok for you). Warm recommendation.
THEN you can join Dalio in all sorts of mental mast… Pursuits.
Hahaha, loved this one! :D
Guard the secrets of your high-performance as the main source of your power
Be strategic with your observations, and keep most of them for yourself
If the business puts people around you to learn from you, never teach them anything unless you’re gaining from it.
Be selectively transparent to a reputation for transparency. Then hide your weaknesses and promote your strengths
If you need to escalate make sure you look proactive rather than incapable -if necessary, take the credit for the escalation and lay the blame of failure on someone else
Make sure you are irreplaceable – and charge accordingly. Guard the secrets of your high-performance as the main source of your power
All of the above PU worthy I think (in career lesson). At least it's in my work notes I'll re-read and these are ideas that are very helpful for me. Results may vary.
Hello Lucio,
Awesome awesome article on Ray Dalio (I love this formulation, hope it's ok for you). Warm recommendation.
THEN you can join Dalio in all sorts of mental mast… Pursuits.
Hahaha, loved this one! :D
Guard the secrets of your high-performance as the main source of your power
Be strategic with your observations, and keep most of them for yourself
If the business puts people around you to learn from you, never teach them anything unless you’re gaining from it.
Be selectively transparent to a reputation for transparency. Then hide your weaknesses and promote your strengths
If you need to escalate make sure you look proactive rather than incapable -if necessary, take the credit for the escalation and lay the blame of failure on someone else
Make sure you are irreplaceable – and charge accordingly. Guard the secrets of your high-performance as the main source of your power
All of the above PU worthy I think (in career lesson). At least it's in my work notes I'll re-read and these are ideas that are very helpful for me. Results may vary.
Lucio Buffalmano and Jack have reacted to this post.
Thank you John!
Great feedback.
If anyone else thinks there was anything PU-worthy there do let me know.
My personal view was that PU gave the foundation to reach those conclusions -ie.: human nature, Machiavellian thinking, WIIFM/WIIFT, "enlightened cynicism" thinking, and conflicts of interests at work-.
But if it wasn't clear, then it's golden feedback and something I'm happy to address in the next update.
Thank you John!
Great feedback.
If anyone else thinks there was anything PU-worthy there do let me know.
My personal view was that PU gave the foundation to reach those conclusions -ie.: human nature, Machiavellian thinking, WIIFM/WIIFT, "enlightened cynicism" thinking, and conflicts of interests at work-.
But if it wasn't clear, then it's golden feedback and something I'm happy to address in the next update.
John Freeman and Jack have reacted to this post.
Hello Lucio,
A question: here escalation means talking to a superior right?
Regarding your note, from my POV and maybe other people will chime in: I think it's the balance between high-quality and machiavellianism (high power/status).
For instance, I tell everyone: "I'm always transparent" and.... I'm always transparent. Of course it does not mean that I will tell everyone what I think. But if the person does not have an information I have in a conversation, I empower them. Especially parents. I protect them sometimes when giving the information is too soon (example: all the diseases a child could have ahead of testing) but I'm giving away information (power) freely if that's good for the person.
Like teaching to people: it's my role and the more I teach the more people are good at their jobs. The more they're good the better children are taken care of. So if I don't teach them as much as I can then I'm failing my mission to care for children. Same with being replaceable, if I'm being high quality I want to empower my employer, etc. for the others (I can comment more specifically to give examples if helpful).
So that's my perspective: it could be the balance between Eagle behaviour and machiavellianism/self-interest. I feel it is in my case.
Hello Lucio,
A question: here escalation means talking to a superior right?
Regarding your note, from my POV and maybe other people will chime in: I think it's the balance between high-quality and machiavellianism (high power/status).
For instance, I tell everyone: "I'm always transparent" and.... I'm always transparent. Of course it does not mean that I will tell everyone what I think. But if the person does not have an information I have in a conversation, I empower them. Especially parents. I protect them sometimes when giving the information is too soon (example: all the diseases a child could have ahead of testing) but I'm giving away information (power) freely if that's good for the person.
Like teaching to people: it's my role and the more I teach the more people are good at their jobs. The more they're good the better children are taken care of. So if I don't teach them as much as I can then I'm failing my mission to care for children. Same with being replaceable, if I'm being high quality I want to empower my employer, etc. for the others (I can comment more specifically to give examples if helpful).
So that's my perspective: it could be the balance between Eagle behaviour and machiavellianism/self-interest. I feel it is in my case.
Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.
Quote from
Jack on January 11, 2024, 2:05 pm
I agree with John, it was an awesome article. Short and packed with wisdom.
very red pill, but in a good way.
If anyone else thinks there was anything PU-worthy there do let me know.
My personal view was that PU gave the foundation to reach those conclusions -ie.: human nature, Machiavellian thinking, WIIFM/WIIFT, "enlightened cynicism" thinking, and conflicts of interests at work-.
I think it’s useful to have it laid out like you did. it is like an instant vaccine against naiveness.
Having the principles and the Machiavellian principles next to each other makes it very easy to understand the concept.
I agree with John, it was an awesome article. Short and packed with wisdom.
very red pill, but in a good way.
If anyone else thinks there was anything PU-worthy there do let me know.
My personal view was that PU gave the foundation to reach those conclusions -ie.: human nature, Machiavellian thinking, WIIFM/WIIFT, "enlightened cynicism" thinking, and conflicts of interests at work-.
I think it’s useful to have it laid out like you did. it is like an instant vaccine against naiveness.
Having the principles and the Machiavellian principles next to each other makes it very easy to understand the concept.
Lucio Buffalmano and John Freeman have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn Freeman
Yes agree that could be the best way to teach it: side by side.
Yes agree that could be the best way to teach it: side by side.
Lucio Buffalmano and Jack have reacted to this post.
BOOM!
Thank you John and Jack, precious feedback, I've taken a note.
BOOM!
Thank you John and Jack, precious feedback, I've taken a note.
John Freeman has reacted to this post.
