-
Albert-Laszlo Barabasi uses the following definition of success: what we are given by our people for what we do. "The rewards we earn from the communities we belong to." All of these are [[external]] and [[collective]] in nature- various forms of [[glory]], [[fame]], and [[income]]. These are more [[measurable]] than internal definitions of success. This, he calls ‘[[performance]]‘- the impact of the performance is more easily measurable than the performance itself.
- So success is about ‘us’ rather than ‘I’ or ‘you’.
- Doing something well is not enough, you have to be easy to know, and easier to remember. So, the response to the performance must be honed as well as the [[performance]] itself.
- To look at how you [[move]] your people, you have to [[look]] and [[listen]] for how they move in response to your moves.
- Who knows you matters, because without them, you will not be able to gain from your performance.
-
How can one part of a [[group]] give the group a reason to claim that part as one of their own, to be proud of that part for being one of them?
collapsed:: true
- The part of the [[group]] has to be useful to the group for the group to promote the part.
- If someone is useful to a [[network]], they will [[amplify]] that one’s success.
- How well you do at something drives success, but if there’s no clear way for people to tell how well you do at something, then the [[people]] you are connected to are what gives success.
- For a [[selective]] program, it’s not the program that makes the entrants elite- it’s the entrants that make the program elite. That is, [[elite]] students pick elite schools, and elite athletes make for elite [[teams]]. The program itself doesn’t typically take lower-achieving individuals and make them high achievers. Rather, it selects for high achievers to call itself an elite program.
- As far as Ivy League success goes, all a student had to do was simply apply to an Ivy League school for it to be predictive of future success, even if they got rejected. This suggests that where the student thinks they belong helps tell where they will go.
- How well you do at something results in success, but if people can’t easily [[agree]] on how well someone is doing, the [[groups]] of people around that person are what gives that person [[success]].
- Artists who started in low-[[prestige]] networks managed to get to high-prestige networks by relentlessly displaying their art in a wider variety of venues than artists who stayed in the low-prestige networks they started in. So, [[variation]] in where you try to succeed can help with success.
- How well you can do is [[limited]], but how much you can get rewarded for what you do is unlimited.
- [[Timing]] is important. Often the last person for an interview (the interviewers get better at asking questions, and so tend to ask the best questions toward the end) or competition will be judged best. In other settings, the first speaker for a vote might set the [[frame]]. Either way, ‘[[when]]‘ is often more important than [[what]] or [[who]].
- Doing well gets you a lottery ticket, so do well in as many competitions as you can. Each time you do well in a [[competition]], it is a ticket.
- Success only comes after performance if the performances in your arena are easily and cheaply [[distributed]].
- To be rewarded for what you do, what you do must be easy to make again for thousands of people.
-
Extremely successful people, the kind of people who are in Cesar Hidalgo’s [[Pantheon]] project, suppress you if you compete against them, but may amplify you if you cooperate with them.
collapsed:: true
- However, what they do is only marginally better than their competition, so you can take ‘em if you treat them like any other competitor.
-
Barabasi’s Third Law: previous success x fitness = future success
- For success, ‘[[fitness]]‘ is how well something can outcompete others of its class to get attention from the same people.
- Those who seem to be doing well attract more support.
- One way to get momentum is to get friends to say good things about our stuff in public. We can also do this for our friends to help their success. However, after the first investment, others predict success less.
-
The more people have said whether something is [[good]] or not, the more how it is thought of is different from how well it does against others like it. At least, when people can see what others have said about that thing. When they can’t, then what they say will one day add up to how well it does against others like it. [[ratings]] [[review]] [[judgement]] [[decisions]]
collapsed:: true
- So, private [[voting]] should reflect preferences better than public voting.
- [[Groups]] need different parts working together to do well, but usually only one person will get the reward for everything the group does.
- Groups do well when the mix of people within them lets them mix both old things and new things. To do this, some people in the [[group]] need to know each other very well, and others must be new. If everyone knows each other well, nothing new is made. If everyone doesn’t know each other, they have trouble making something together.
- Groups do well when they have a lot of different kinds of people with a single [[direction]] driven by a single person. [[diversity]]
-
All-star groups where each member is picked for what they do well as individuals tend to fall to infighting. [[unity]]
collapsed:: true
- [[Groups]] that work well together are not the groups with the best individuals, they’re the ones where each one in the group talks and [[listens]] to all the others.
- From trying again and again, success might happen in any moment.
-
Success comes from turning what is imagined into something you can touch, over and over again.
- What you do must resonate with lots and lots of people, for success.
-
-
-
-