How Do The Quintessential Entrepreneurs of Our Time Make Decisions?
How many of us ask ourselves, “What is the formula for success”? How did the rich get their wealth? May financially successful people share their path to success in books and movies, but is it just determination and luck? Or do they have a unique fundamental cognitive approach that some of us will never be able to access?
The team at The Next Move LLC in Chicago analyzes the cognitive patterns of individuals and how the patterns help or hinder success. Meaning, does an individual emphasize seizing business opportunities, or being more analytical or finding creative solutions to problems? The concepts used in the analysis are based on the principles that subconscious movement patterns in the body correlate directly to cognitive processes. We can also correlate movement patterns with how collaborative one is with others or if they like to work independently. These concepts have been studied and proven since the 1970’s, most recently at Harvard University, Brown University and the Naval War College.
The modern day quintessential examples of success are the Shark Tank team! How did they all get to their level of success? Our team took a novel approach to get a view into the cognitive patters of several individuals on the Shark Tank team, by watching many episodes and piecing together what we saw. Although these episodes were not the ideal platform for analysis, we hope this exercise will bring hope to the millions striving for success!
Our team assessed Ms. Lori Greiner, Mr. Daymond John or Mr. Robert Herjavec. We found consistencies between them as well as variations in their cognitive approaches, which lead to their entertaining disagreements on television, but also their collective success. We offer you small snippets of our insights here.
Mr. John takes a strongly strategic approach to his work, to position himself within the big picture for more selective action. He values working “smarter”, and designing initiatives accordingly. Mr. John’s strategic emphasis is very strongly on being realistic, prioritizing, having clarity, complemented by a strong vision. With sufficient information, he pulls a focus, quickly simplifies complex matters, creating crystal clarity for himself and for the teams he works with. He spends much of his time weighing pros and cons and prioritizing initiatives, potentially to the point of being black and white.
Ms. Greiner has some similarities with Mr. John’s cognitive approach. She also has a heavy emphasis on strategic context and big picture. Ms. Greiner leans heavier on her vision than Mr. John, also with a complement of priorities and realism but not to the extent of Mr. John’s emphasis in this area.
Both Ms. Greiner’s and Mr. John’s short-term tactical maneuvers are rarely random, typically linking to long-term goals. Both anticipate positive and negative consequences of actions that may be taken, and are able to adjust course for corrective action. Both also spend significant time focusing on staging actions and goals for the future. It will be rare for either to have a care free, live in the moment experience.
Ms. Greiner and Mr. John may prefer to work at a steady pace but have the potential to adjust timing when necessary, accelerating or decelerating their pace. Neither is driven by race-like competition, particular if the initiative does not fulfill their vision. However, a competitive nature may emerge by wanting to be the best at something, not necessarily the first.
Mr. Herjavec’s success arises from different cognitive patterns. Other than the common strategic view of long-term vision, he takes less of an emphasis of the big picture, and prefers to push up his sleeves and put energy into working hard. He may take the approach that working hard leads to success. Unlike Mr. John and Ms. Greiner who gather sufficient detailed information, Herjavec prefers a greater level of investigation and analysis in his initiatives, which then feeds to a strong emphasis on seizing opportunities and swift tactical maneuvering to fulfill his vision. Also in contrast to Greiner and John, Herjavec may value being first to the opportunities and has a preference time his work appropriately accelerating or decelerating with ease.
Mr. John and Mr. Herjavec will typically share information and opinions when asked by others. John rarely shares liberally without prompting. Whereas, Ms. Greiner prefers to initiate communicative environments and the exchange of information at the get go.
All three selectively engage in the emotions and initiatives of others, which may come across as aloof at times, even when not intended. Also consistent between the three are that they are not easily distracted; none are stubborn; and will successfully find ways around obstacles, not necessarily preferring to push through them. All three also have the motivation to create a team collaborative environment, however Mr. Herjavec and Mr. John carry a slight preference to execute on their own.
What can we gather from this analysis? Maybe there is no formula? The variations in strategic emphasis, preference to details, timing, emphasis on priorities or collaboration style all means that there’s more than one formula to success. Have any of us gotten anywhere with the articles of five traits of successful people? Or is it just a matter of understanding your own cognitive approach and leveraging it for your own unique path to success!