 |
|
|
|||||
Biographies of exceptional achievers tend to explain their success through personality traits, highlighting the killer psychological weapons that made them great. So, Steve Jobss abrasiveness is reframed as visionary perfectionism, Elon Musks impulsivity as bold risk-taking, and Jeff Bezoss relentlessness as uncompromising customer obsession. The same retrospective alchemy applies to women: Oprah Winfreys emotional intensity becomes radical empathy and authenticity; Indra Nooyis discipline and conscientiousness are recast as values-driven, long-term strategic leadership; and Diane Hendrickss toughness and impatience with incompetence are celebrated as decisive execution and operational rigor. In every case, traits that might once have seemed problematic are retrofitted into virtues once success makes the story worth telling. The reality, as always, is a lot more nuanced than our limited patience and attention span appears to tolerate these days, namely all human traits or behavioral patterns can be both good and bad depending on the context, level, or outcome examined. So, for instance, confidence is generally good but when its decoupled from actual competence or extremely high, it may impede learning, make people look foolish and arrogant, and lead to significant underestimation of risks, delusional grandiosity, and reality distortion. To add yet another caveat: this is more likely in certain cultures (collectivistic, self-critical, humble) than others (individualistic, optimistic, and arrogant). {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}} All things in moderation This is why Aristotle wisely argued (as did Confucius before him) that virtue lies in moderation: the sweet midpoint between two equally problematic extremes. Courage, for example, sits between cowardice and recklessness; generosity between stinginess and wastefulness; ambition between apathy and obsession. Modern science quietly (because few people seem to listen or be interested in grasping this) agrees with him: too little of a good thing leaves potential unrealized, but too much turns strength into liability. One of the traits that illustrates this nicely is perfectionism, which evokes both positives and negatives in the general publicso much so, that its often suggested as a universal answer to the dreaded (and not very useful) whats your biggest weakness job interview question. At low levels, perfectionism may reflect carelessness or disengagement. At moderate levels, it can signal high standards, diligence, and pride in ones work. But once it crosses a certain threshold, perfectionism stops being about excellence and becomes about fear: fear of mistakes, fear of judgment, fear of falling short. At that point, it no longer improves performance. Instead, it fuels anxiety, indecision, micromanagement, burnout, and strained relationships. The challenge for organizations is that perfectionism often looks like commitment, especially in cultures that reward overwork, self-criticism, and constant busyness. But the real leadership task is not to eliminate high standards, but to prevent standards from hardening into self-punishment or control over others. Thus, as with confidence, ambition, or drive, the goal is not more or less, but enough (or the right amount), and knowing when enough has tipped into too much. A new approach In line, a new academic review synthesizes decades of research into perfectionism, defined as a stable tendency to set excessively high standards for oneself or others, combined with overly critical self-evaluation and a chronic concern with mistakes, evaluation, and failure. This research distinguishes between striving for excellence and being driven by fear of imperfection; a distinction that helps explain why perfectionism so often undermines well-being and collaboration while delivering only fragile or short-lived performance gains. More specifically, the review highlights both the pros and cons of being a perfectionist, evaluating its broad impact on individuals, teams, leadership, and organizations. Three pros (when its the right kind) Higher engagement and goal attainment (under narrow conditions)Perfectionistic strivings (high personal standards driven internally) are associated with greater work engagement, persistence, goal achievement, and satisfaction, especially in structured, predictable roles where quality and precision matter. This can translate into diligence and follow-through rather than brilliance. Attention to detail and decision thoroughness in leadersLeaders high in self-oriented perfectionism tend to pay closer attention to detail and, in some contexts, make more comprehensive strategic decisions. In relatively stable environments, this has been linked to better decision quality and organizational resilience. Short-term performance signaling and credibilityPerfectionism can function as a reputational signal, conveying conscientiousness, reliability, and seriousness, particularly early in careers or in performance-pressured environments. This may support initial career progression, even if the advantages fade over time. Three cons (and these are generally more robust) Worse well-being with little performance payoffAcross studies and meta-analyses, perfectionism shows weak or no association with job performance, but moderate to strong associations with burnout, stress, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, and poor recovery. In short, it reliably depletes people without reliably improving output. Workahoism, rumination, and inability to switch offPerfectionistic concerns are consistently linked to overcommitment, presenteeism, procrastination, and difficulty psychologically detaching from work. Even breaks become cognitively exhausting because perfectionists continue to ruminate about mistakes and unfinished tasks. Toxic leadership and downstream harm to othersWhen perfectionism shows up as socially prescribed or other-oriented (imposing flawlessness on others), leaders are more likely to micromanage, punish mistakes, undermine psychological safety, trigger deviance, and reduce creativity and well-being in followers. This is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in the leadership section of the review. Try excellencism instead In short, perfectionism is not a performance or self-presentational strategy, but a personality trait linked to a fragile motivational style that works under limited conditions; at worst, it is a scalable mechanism for burnout, toxic leadership, and self-sabotage. The authors explicitly point to excellencism (very high but flexible standards without fear of failure) as a healthier and more sustainable alternative. For leaders and organizations, the implication is clear: the goal is not to hire, promote, or reward perfectionists, but to cultivate excellence without fear. High standards are essential, but only when paired with flexibility, learning, and psychological safety. In an economy that increasingly rewards speed, adaptation, and collaboration over flawless execution, the most effective leaders are not those who never err, but those who know when precision matters and when good enough is not a compromise but a strategic choice. Perfectionism mistakes control for quality. Excellence optimizes for impact. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
The Republican National Committee has vastly outpaced Democrats in the crush for cash ahead of the midterm elections, holding a nearly $100 million advantage at the close of 2025, according to year-end filings to the Federal Election Commission.As Democrats have struggled in the Trump era, the RNC tallied $172 million raised in 2025, with $95 million cash on hand at year’s end. In contrast, the Democratic National Committee posted $145 million for the year, with $14 million on hand and $17 million in debt, to start the new year underwater.It’s all pointing to a turbulent election cycle ahead as President Donald Trump fights political headwinds that tend to brush back the party in power, in this case Republican control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, and reward challengers during the midterms.In the campaigns for control of Congress, the total hauls are less stark. House Republicans posted one of their stronger years, raising $13 million in the last month of the year, to close with more than $117 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee, the main campaign arm. House Democrats trailed slightly at $115 million.Both of the House committees started 2026 with about $50 million cash on hand, according to the filings, which were due to the FEC this weekend. A similar dynamic is playing out in the Senate.House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday the GOP’s overall fundraising haul left him “bullish” on the party’s chances to not only hold onto their razor-thin majority in the House, but grow it with more members.“We’re going to have a war chest to run on,” Johnson, R-La., said on “Fox News Sunday.”To be sure, the fundraising totals reflect the 2025 calendar year, before the onslaught of actions and events that have scrambled the nation’s politics in the first month of the new year.From the U.S. military attack on Venezuela to the shooting deaths of two Americans protesting the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions in Minneapolis, it’s not at all certain whether voters and donors will undergo lasting shifts in their attitudes toward the political parties.“Momentum is on our side,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which supports the House Democrats.He said the Republicans are “running scared” because the Democrats have better candidates and a better message for voters as the party tries to wrest back control of the House.In the Senate, the National Republican Senatorial Committee raised $88 million in 2025, closing out the year with $19.3 million cash on hand. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $79.8 million, but ended up slightly better with $21.7 million cash on hand. Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Every company wants to be innovative. Most approach this by trying to hire highly creative specialists or by spinning up a new innovation team. But companies that consistently innovate do something different: They build company-wide systems focused on customer solutions and make innovation part of everyday business. Smart organizations focus on building reliable processes to understand customers, test assumptions, and scale what works. In my experience at Verra Mobility, the difference between companies that talk about innovation and companies that deliver it often comes down to a repeatable process that drives creativity. QUESTION EVERYTHING YOU “KNOW” The biggest innovation killer isn’t resistance to change; its the assumption that we already know the answer. When someone says they “know” what customers want, we dig deeper. Who did you talk to? How long ago did you talk to them? In our business reviews, we’ve made it mandatory for every business review to include not only operational performance, but also market updates and competitive intelligence. We want to push people to ask more questions, not just review more slides. This creates a culture where expertise is valued, assumptions are challenged, and customer insight drives decisions. When you force teams to back up their opinions with current data, they start questioning how they’ve worked and look for better solutions. UNDERSTAND WHAT CUSTOMERS WANT TO ACCOMPLISH Most innovation fails because we solve the wrong problems. Teams focus on how customers are using a product instead of understanding what theyre trying to achieve. Take time to sit with customers and understand their complete workflowswhich teams they interact with, how they’d be impacted by process changes, and identifying opportunities to improve. Go deeper than marketing personas to understand the decision makers who will ultimately sign off on new programs. A few years ago, a car rental company client told us their biggest issue wasnt reconciling $100 traffic violations, it was accounting for daily $10 tolls. We created a whole new business line for automated toll management. We started with one state, then expanded based on what worked. MAKE EXPERIMENTATION PART OF THE PROCESS Innovation requires observation, but success requires testing assumptions quickly and cheaply. We’ve built experimentation into our standard improvement process. When teams create solutions, I ask them to identify their biggest assumptions upfront, then look at the probability that assumption is correct. If we’re not sure, we test it quickly with a pilot or single customer trial. Take rough prototypeseven napkin drawingsdirectly to customers. The less finished it looks, the more honest the feedback you receive. When something looks polished, people don’t want to hurt your feelings. When it’s obviously a sketch, they’ll tell you exactly what’s wrong. Rather than funding only well-developed ideas in annual planning cycles, we create ways to test concepts early and build our business on what succeeds. MAKE INNOVATION EVERYONE’S JOB Innovation isnt a special teams responsibility. Everyone needs the mindset that there’s always room for improvement, and that they play an active role in identifying solutions. When innovation is part of everyones daily work, it becomes sustainable. This means regular forums where teams share customer insights and have clear processes for moving from hypothesis to experiment to implementation. It means bringing together product management, sales, and customer success to ensure new innovations don’t create support nightmares. Most experiments will failbut they’ll fail fast and cheap, not slow and expensive. THE INNOVATION DISCIPLINE Here’s what most companies get wrong: They think innovation is about creativity and inspiration. While those are important, real success is driven by discipline and systems. Companies that succeed long-term create processes where good ideas surface, get tested quickly, and spread when they work. Any organization can do that if theyre willing to watch, question, and pilot solutions quickly. David Roberts is CEO of Verra Mobility.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||