This is the clearest example of participation trophy mindset.

#1: Real collaboration requires contribution value Collaboration is a sum of the parts effort—everyone has strengths that in a team setting compound into results that exceed individual efforts.

Even in a sum-of-the parts financial analysis, the performance of each business segment is calculated and totaled to determine overall firm value—there is no getting around each segment having its own EBITDA, EV/EVITDA multiple, and enterprise value.

#2: Collaborating with contributing is freeloading A highly capable and self-aware person understands that not everyone is operating at their same speed, but the expectation of maximum contribution of all parties involved remains.

Rejecting freeloading is not “unfair.” You are rarely sneaking your lighter contribution passed anyone; often, you have been written off as a future collaboration partner.

#3: A contribution value mindset There are very simple questions to clarify if a person’s contribution value was significant or minimal—use them to evaluate yours to projects and teams.

Would the outcome have been the same without my involvement? What’s the probability that it would or would not have been? Could you defend yourself with a list of contributions if someone said, “you didn’t do anything?”

It goes without saying but the more senior your role, the more significant your contribution value ought to be. Further, there is no presumption of equal in professional settings when individuals provide different value.

#4: Collaboration when leading teams Good leaders share credit for their achievements, but they protect the efforts of the different members of their team. Bad leaders permit freeloading because they prefer to be liked or to avoid uncomfortable conversations.

What I mean when I think about the phrase “It’s not personal” or close derivatives like “takes things personally,” means who you are as a person was not the determining factor on pursuing a course of action.

Put differently, the situation or circumstance or behavior in question with another person would result in the same or very similar treatment.

#1: It is interpreted to mean everything but my definition There’s no consensus definition and most people don’t know what they mean by it—could you even write a definition or how-to guide for yours?

My definition is not synonymous with “you’re overacting,” “you’re too sensitive,” or similar dismissals of feelings. In fact, I expect an emotional reaction to most things, especially bad news (which is often what brings about this phrase).

That said, the emotion(s) felt, how deep and the duration for which they are felt, and related factors are all variables outside of my control. Even the most delicately delivered message(s) can be taken personally.

#2: The counterarguments never address my definition “But it is personal” is not a legitimate rebuttal to: put a different person in your place and the outcome would be the same.

“It’s hard to not take things personally” is subjective and mindset related.

Opening the gates to this line of discussion is moot.

#3: Understanding is predicated on having life principles Many people inaccurately perceive feelings to have been overlooked or mental rigidity but these things often net out to: all things considered, this is not worth flexing, adjusting, or discarding my beliefs for…at least in my case.

A person with clear life principles has done the complicated modeling in their head weighing the other factors or interpersonal context and has decided on this course of action.

When you haven’t yet chosen to live by anything, you can roll with everything.

The Takeaway The principle: Avoid use if you can; ask for a definition when it is heard The practice/manifestation: Replace yourself in the situation and internalize that the outcome would not have change—it is you agnostic.

Note: I’ll be releasing an atomic essay every day for the month of January. If you’d be interested in a deeper dive with practical applications on any topic, collect an NFT so I know.

My notes for this one includes additional ways to not take things personally, including addressing the “how you say it” or “how it lands matters too” aspects.

#1: 51% rule The essence of a person is who they are on most of their days.

But pattern matching behavior and discerning frequency does not come naturally to folks. Most people evaluate themselves on their best days and downplay the frequency of their worst day behaviors.

Think of the adjectives that describe you and evaluate whether you embody them in 51% of situations.

If you don’t, you are a tourist in the behavior or value—not a permanent resident. It’s not who you actually are.

#2: With who rule How much a person’s background influences your behavior is a relevant factor.

I evaluate a person based on how they treat others more than how they treat me and I have ended relationships on this basis more than people would suspect.

Evaluating character requires taking a 360-degree view of them as people edit and present themselves differently to different audiences.

A secure and self-aware person showing up consistently in a particular way is comfortable with those qualities; someone who dramatically shapeshifts based on their audience is opportunistically demonstrating those qualities.

How do you show up and with whom?

#3: Evaluate with the harsh language As a society, we prefer to limit negative terminology to men and spin similar shortcomings in women to have a positive bend.

Example: A woman is always a people pleaser never a spineless. There is no gendered equivalent for punk, often used by a man. So on and so forth.

Softer language absolving one of person accountability undermines growth—a halo prevents a person from taking a hard look at themselves.

When evaluating your behavior, identity harder synonyms and determine if you would be okay with those labels—people are not as generous with their evaluations as you may be with yourself.

#4: Stress test your assumptions about yourself Everything you believe about yourself is a hypothesis yet to be proven true, unless you have historical record of encountering the experience or that demonstrates operating under similar conditions.

A person having a different point of view about an opportunity or situation is the result of a different underwriting model based on information about themselves you may not be privy to.

Too often people look at behaviors and assume similar motivations but [working long hours is not being a workaholic](https://spending time alone is not the same as isolating), spending time alone is not the same as isolating, being kind is not people pleasing, sleeping less than eight hours is not sleep deprived, and not having boundaries is not being emotionally unavailable.

Some people are making informed, boundaried decisions—self-awareness and self-knowledge are not correlated with age. You should focus on yourself as keeping up with the joneses without understanding their personal context could result in your own burnout.

It’s actionable and supercharges your communication—here’s why it’s important.

#1: Most words have very ambiguous definitions There is no socially agreed upon definition for most words we frequently use—only shades of alignment between people that have similar views and life experiences.

This is a truism you can (unsuccessfully) attempt to disprove by simply asking five people near you “define nice in a single sentence?” If there’s consensus, change the group’s composition (genders, race, cultural, income, etc.).

And few words are perfect substitutes for each other. Is nice the same as kind? I don’t think so, neither does he, and neither does she.

This isn’t to be a vocab snob but illustrate: common language with diverging definition lies at the heart of most miscommunication.

#2: Trains clarity of thought When you accept the subjectivity of most language, you gift yourself the driver’s seat.

It forces second-order thinking: how do I define that?

Example: wrong is wrong, period—very black and white. How wrong (or right) is relevant but different. Directionally correct means…? Different things to different users.

But its subjectivity presents (🎁) an opportunity to define the variable.

#3: Promotes agency in interpersonal dynamics What you have defined, you can communicate (or refine)—what you have not defined, you struggle to put into words.

You can always panhandle for better language or other peoples’ definitions cite as references, but at the end of the day you have to draft your own dictionary with definitions and examples.

Missing words can be found (independently; with support)—you have surfaced a known unknown. Little thought shows poor awareness—you have an unknown unknown.

You take a more empowered position in a conversation when have isolated: what am I trying to figure out or gain from this interaction?

#4: Enables you to get up to speed on a situation or team faster Most communication is an exercise in reconciling terms and perspectives. Those who understand focus on closing understanding gaps.

This makes good communicators good listeners—they seek to understand the other party’s assumptions (how their variables are defined).

Clarifying language is an aid: “it sounds like” “what I am hearing is” “I am not clear on” “can you elaborate on” “I get the impression,” “is it correct to say,” “I don’t think we’re that far apart on,” etc.

After all, you cannot bridge gaps if you are unclear where the other party sits.

#5: Reduces conflict avoidance tendencies Once you realize most communication is an exercise in reconciling terms and perspectives, you become less conflict avoidant.

You start to see communication as an accordion—two sides needing to come together with shared responsibility in closing the gap.

Good communicators know the quality of interpersonal dynamics is not measure by the absence of or infrequency of tension but how quickly and productively tension can be resolved.

#6: Makes perceptions matter less (or less limiting) How someone reacts to you is through their filters and serves their agenda (often ego protection).

To an insecure or fragile person, everyone is confident, is intimidating, or has a strong personality. To a people pleaser, anything short of “you’re great” is harsh, toxic, or abusive.

People with higher emotional intelligence and greater life experience know this and will, like I do, ask “what makes you say that” when people (negatively) label others.

Perception is a two-way street, it is fickle, and there is always a market for all dispositions, but some lend themselves to more satisfaction in life and career…

#7: Clarifies the bounds of personhood for you A person principled about their words is clear on what they said and what they didn’t say.

There is little confusion around their message and the range of incorrect interpretations one could collect from what they say—there is clarity on where they end and another person begins.

Commitments or invitations are not entered into lightly.

Game theory about openness does not matter when you know how you will respond under various conditions.

#8: Shows how common dysfunctional relationships are We celebrate cowardliness and criminalize courageous communication because dysfunctional relationships have become normalized (and even glorified).

But clear is kind and unclear is unkind—there is not much more to it. Confusion presents an opportunity to ask for clarity.

We’re not playing in the sandbox and our terrible twos have passed. It is fine if you are not there yet but no one is obligated to participate in your chaos or collude in your self-deception.

The Takeaway The principle: Clear communication changes your life. The practice/manifestation: Defining your terms or variables.

Note: I’ll be releasing an atomic essay every day for the month of January. If you’d be interested in a deeper dive with practical applications on any topic, collect an NFT so I know.

#1: They take a tectonic plates approach to personal growth Continental drift is the theory that the Earth’s continents are constantly moving—effortless people take a similar approach to growth and change.

Instead of seismic undertakings, effortless people are constantly learning, thinking, and applying. This creates subtle, continuous shifts that eventually compound to become visible to others.

They also know the most defining changes come from catalytic events much like colliding tectonic plates form mountains, volcanos, and the Earth’s other topography. They lean into these moments and see beauty in the changing terrain (whether positively inspired or not).

#2: They never pass up the first opportunity to implement advice Effortless people implement advice immediately upon receipt—no matter how shaky they feel on execution. When it is received, the gears have begun to turn on how to execute on it.

Instead of focusing on nailing it the first time, effortless people are getting accustom to the act of doing it. Each attempt offers lessons to apply and, eventually, you have mastered the art of handling a particular situation.

#3: They turn advice into broader principles Effortless people look for broader applications of advice.

Instead of seeing advice being situation-specific or confined to one aspect of life, effortless people extrapolate advice in pursuit of macro principles that can be integrated across all realms of life.

The takeaway Surprise, it isn’t effortless—it’s simply unnoticed effort.

Note: This is my first atomic essay and I’ll be publishing one every day for the month of January 2022. If you’d like to read deeper dives on any, collect an NFT—this will determine how I spend my time when it comes to long-form pieces.