If they choose to have a primarily win-win cooperative-competitive relationship, they must take into consideration what is really important to the other and try to give it to them in exchange for them reciprocating. (1/6)
In that type of win-win relationship, they can have tough negotiations done with respect and consideration, competing like two friendly merchants at a bazaar or two friendly teams at the Olympics. (2/6)
If they choose to have a lose-lose mutually threatening relationship they will primarily think about how they can hurt the other in the hope of forcing the other into a position of fear in order to get what they want. (3/6)
In that type of lose-lose relationship they will have more destructive wars than productive exchanges. (4/6)
Having win-win relationships is obviously better than having lose-lose relationships, but they are often very difficult to have, which brings me to the prisoner’s dilemma dynamic. (5/6)
To read more principles about what makes empires rise and decline over time, see linkedin.com/pulse/archetyp… (6/6)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you want to be followed, either for egotistical reasons or because you believe it more expedient to operate that way, you will pay a heavy price in the long run. When you are the only one thinking, the results will suffer.
Authoritarian managers don't develop their subordinates, which means those who report to them stay dependent.
This hurts everyone in the long run. If you give too many orders, people will likely resent them, and when you aren't looking, defy them.
I don't use the word "leadership" to describe what I do or what I think is good because I don't believe that what most people think of as "good leadership" is effective. (1/4)
Most people think a good leader is a strong person who engenders confidence in others and motivates them to follow him/her, with the emphasis on "follow." (2/4)
The stereotypical leader often sees questioning and disagreement as threatening and prefers people do what they're told. As an extension of this paradigm, the leader bears the main burden of decision making. (3/4)
Every day you are faced with an infinite number of things that come at you. Let’s call them “dots.” To be effective, you need to be able to tell which dots are important and which dots are not. (1/4)
Some people go through life collecting all kinds of observations and opinions like pocket lint, instead of just keeping what they need. They have “detail anxiety,” worrying about unimportant things. (2/4)
Sometimes small things can be important—for example, that little rattle in your car’s engine could just be a loose piece of plastic or it could be a sign your timing belt is about to snap. (3/4)
The question that Americans have to answer is: are the principles that bind us together greater or weaker than the principles that are tearing us apart? (1/6)
Before we collectively, as a country, can decide what to do, we must try to reach an agreement on what we want most and how we should deal with each other to get it. In other words, we must see if we can agree on our most fundamental principles. (2/6)
To be a truly united United States we must reaffirm our vows on the biggest shared principles and, in pursuit of them, reaffirm our protocols for thoughtful disagreement through a process that the overwhelming majority of Americans agree with. (3/6)
"Learning must come before deciding. Your brain stores different types of learning in your subconscious, your rote memory bank, and your habits. (1/7)
But no matter how you acquire your knowledge or where you store it, what’s most important is that what you know paints a true and rich picture of the realities that will affect your decision. (2/7)
That’s why it always pays to be radically open- minded and seek out believable others as you do your learning. Many people have emotional trouble doing this and block the learning that could help them make better decisions. (3/7)
I’ve systematized my study of bubbles over time into a “bubble indicator” based on six influences, which are combined into gauges. We do this for each stock that we are looking at
then these gauges are combined into aggregate indices by security and then for the market as a whole. This chart shows the aggregate reading derived by combining these gauges into one reading for the stock market going back to 1910.
It shows how the conditions stack up today for US equities in relation to past times. In brief, the aggregate bubble gauge is around the 77th percentile today for the US stock market overall.