May 11
25
The great myth about “content” instead of “context”
Context before Content
Lets play marketing cliché buzzword bingo …..
“the method, the way, the system, the philosophy, the secret, the patented formula, the unique principals, our proprietary systems, our proven methodology, step by step easy to follow content, world champion endorsed product, more successful athletes than..insert hyperbole, etc etc”
Everyone is looking for that special formula aren’t they? – in business and in sport even in their relationships (why is Opra so popular?)
The logic behind this is to replicate a system of success and apply it to a new case- the magical “content”
No wonder higher education is so desired by the business community- that Harvard MBA or the London Business School – Master of Economic degree will put you on par with the board members of Macquarie Bank or HSBC ….who are successful guys right? Learn the same content and you’ll be flying….
Does this actually work in practice?
When we look at the traits of exceptional people and exceptional groups very rarely do they emulate what others are doing. In order to differentiate you have to go where others are not prepared to. Take some risks and do something different.
Many sporting greats train alone or in isolated environments for extended periods. We’ve all read about the habits of Mark Allen or Peter Reid, Roger Federer, or African runners living in little villages. Often they eschew the methods of the day and live a little unconventionally for a while- briefly surfacing to blitz their competition. Many many successful athletes are very private and confined people
So what happens when these people succeed? Everyone wants to get a hold of their method. Hundreds sign up for Mark Allen Online or beg to be taken on by Gordo (who trained a heap alone or small groups) or Brett Sutton (who has an isolated group in asia). They all want to follow the formula “X” for success and get their hands on the special content
Now dont get me wrong you can attain a great deal of success by studying a proven method well. Earning a MBA from Wharton or reading Dave Scott’s books will certainly get you started. But thats what it is a start or a good leg up
How do you know that training like Dave does is right for you? Is running a business the way a McKinsey consultant or the way Jack Welsh ran GE going to suit your needs? For some people it may get them much further down the line than they would ever get themselves so we can only see the positives if used the right way.
But getting 100% sold on a “method” is one of the greatest mistakes someone can make. Did Brett Sutton get to be good at what he does by listening to what everyone else said all the time? Or did he study hard, think about it and then doggedly set his own course with a lot of energy? You know the answer there. He succeeded by being his own man. Not a sheep in herd. I’ve seen a lot of coaches who have attained very high results using a method but are completely inflexible when a different athlete comes along- thats their perrogative. Or they lament that other coaches are doing it all wrong- by not doing it his way=proven. People doing exactly what s/he did- being their own man. Many strong charismatic coaches often overpower their athletes opinions to suit their own needs= making money and increasing their referent power. Some athletes are strong enough to push back -many are not. I think its an antiquainted philosophy to say “I expect an athlete to do everything without question”- thats insecure and pretty outdated if you ask me. Most people who really know what they are doing are not intimidated by someone who challenges them in a reasonable way (emphasis on reasonable- their are some age groupers is particular that are uncoachable)
Which is why replicating “method” success is so hard. People often mistakenly focus on the content instead of the context. Its not how Roger Federer structures a training session that makes him so good I would hazzard to say. But undoubtedly he trains with incredible focus, puts very high standards on himself and attempts to do things that other people dont (or havent even thought about trying). You and I could go hit the same number of balls on the same courts, do the same programs etc but without his intensity, focus and context it wont have the same result. You’d be surprised how simple and boring the content actually is in a lot of their programs
So for mine thats the big take out of “methodologies” ie Dont have them. Remain open minded to what methodology you use- doesnt matter if its unconventional or not. Im not saying have no content or become to lazy to look at what others do but spend most of your energy on the context of your training. Place high expectations. Never worry about what anyone else is doing. Keep it private. Keep at it -consistently. Take regular reality checks- if its not working dont worry about what works for Joe Friel or Brett Sutton- find something that works for you-your own formula for success. Dont bullshit yourself-make it results based.
Context before context. Methodology is something you study then put back on the shelf. Leave methods to the sheep
