A mathematical model has now cracked the exact degree to which one should be ambitious, and contrary to conventional wisdom, it says 'don't shoot for the stars'. Researchers at the University of Wyoming, Stanford University, and the University of Colorado-Boulder developed the model to demonstrate that ambition lies in the middle — above average but finite.
Study Overview
Conventional wisdom often advises people not to settle, but also not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The researchers wanted to see whether the math supports that intuition. According to lead author Kath Landgren, a postdoctoral scholar at Stanford's Doerr School of Sustainability, the math does support it, with some interesting twists.
The Ambition Model
The researchers studied a model of searching for the best available strategy, where a strategy could represent anything from a job to a business idea, a romantic partner, or a public policy or political campaign. In their study titled 'Optimal ambition in business, politics and life', they proved that people achieve the best results when they use a satisfaction threshold that is above average but not extremely high. The threshold should be neither too high nor too low; however, if it is too high, it is worse.
Matt Burgess, an economist at the University of Wyoming, noted that people often receive conflicting advice: on one hand, not to settle for what they have, and on the other, not to chase the unachievable and be disappointed. The core insight from the work is that individuals are typically best off if they try to do better than average, but not infinitely well.
Major Takeaways
Led by Dr. Kath Landgren, the study reveals that being a perfectionist is damaging to success. For tech entrepreneurs, being less ambitious relative to their market's average is advisable. A few companies and billionaires pull the mathematical average sky-high, far past what is typical or realistic. If one sets that inflated average as their ambition, they set themselves up for immediate discouragement.
Additionally, looking at highly successful people on social media changes decision-making efficiency. The model shows that when people see successful individuals and compare themselves with them, their ability to make smart decisions drops.
This research provides a mathematical foundation for balancing ambition, helping individuals avoid the pitfalls of both under-ambition and over-ambition.
