Simon - let's get real about these labels. Yes, I use A/B player terminology. Not because one is better, but because it's the language of business we all understand.
But here's the truth about these labels:
A-players aren't "better" - they're just playing a different game with different costs. They trade balance for impact, stability for intensity, life for results.
B-players aren't "lesser" - they're choosing sustainability over surge, consistency over chaos, balance over burnout.
In business, we default to grading systems. A feels "better" than B. But that's the exact bs I'm challenging.
So if both have value, why is one of them labeled as the „A-player“? Which would bring the other automatically to a degraded B-player?
Simon - let's get real about these labels. Yes, I use A/B player terminology. Not because one is better, but because it's the language of business we all understand.
But here's the truth about these labels:
A-players aren't "better" - they're just playing a different game with different costs. They trade balance for impact, stability for intensity, life for results.
B-players aren't "lesser" - they're choosing sustainability over surge, consistency over chaos, balance over burnout.
In business, we default to grading systems. A feels "better" than B. But that's the exact bs I'm challenging.
Every path comes with a cost.