Good guys finish...

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/01/good-guys-finis.html

by bdfh42 • 18 years ago

13 17 18 years ago

sethgodin.typepad.com

cmos2• 18 years ago

First. Always and forever. It just might not seem that way in the short term.

unalone5• 18 years ago

Always and forever.

I don't think so. I think there are a lot of nice guys who've been bumped down, kept out of the mainstream, even nice guys who've died before their time. There's no law of the world saying nice guys get ahead, even if there's none saying the opposite.

I think nice guys and not-nice guys will always be neck-and-neck, and in the end it will be impossible to differentiate between the two, so it's not worth worrying about anything other than whether you yourself will be able to make it.

cmos2• 18 years ago

ah yes, they may have not finished first in the 'money' or 'career' race, but they could sleep better at night.

c1sc0• 18 years ago

First. History has a way of catching up with those who cross the lines on ethics. e.g. see Rosalind Franklin and James Watson. If you end up doing something truly great you'll be in the crosshairs of public attention, and boy, are you going to be wishing you're clean.

michaelkeenan• 18 years ago

There are historical examples of unethical behavior that was noticed and consequences occurred. But the amount of unethical behavior that wasn't noticed, and wasn't recorded in history, is unknowable. We don't know what percentage of unethical behavior history catches up with.

As I see it, a sufficient reason to be ethical is that it's right, not because it's rewarding to wealth or reputation.

abdulhaq2• 18 years ago

The question raised in the article is based on a flawed assumption: that success is measured in material wealth.

The successful person is the one who does the most good, irrespective of his bank balance. Therefore the businessman who behaves ethically is _by definition_ more successful than the one who is prepared to behave unethically.

unalone5• 18 years ago

_by definition_

The definition of success has nothing to do with morals. I'm certain there are a lot of unethical people making money who consider themselves huge successes. Similarly, there are a lot of people with no money at all who think the same about themselves.

The question has to do with material wealth. Any answer that deal in anything but material wealth would be sidestepping the question. Godin doesn't deal with ethic, he deals with profit and results. It's why he's as famous as he is. You might disagree with that method, but that's how he works and it's what's made him a success.

abdulhaq2• 18 years ago

'Success' of course needs to be defined in a context and yes, in general he is talking about financial success, but the specific issue in his post is so-called 'spiritual business'. He talks about 'increasing light'.

My point is that for a 'spiritual person', true success is aimed for in the long-term measure - the one by which we are ultimately judged - whether deemed to be judged by ourselves or a third party. So to ask, in the context of 'spiritual business' about success, meaning financial success, is something of a contradiction in terms.

fallentimes• 18 years ago

It's very hard to define, but here's my favorite definition:

"Success is the percentage of your life you control" -Chuck Klosterman

mynameishere• 18 years ago

In the context of business, the person who creates the most wealth is the most moral. In other contexts, handing out pennies to orphans may well be more important.

corentin• 18 years ago

Well, the successful person is the one who reaches the goals he sets for himself.

If your goal is to become rich no matter what, you can become very successful as a drug baron.

It looks like you're confusing successful and respectable.

antidaily• 18 years ago

'When past investors blog about how successful and ethical you were, it's a lot easier to attract new investors.'

Relying on the slim hope that a new investor is reading a past investor's blog just sounds goofy to me. Not to mention that I don't think I've ever read a post from an investor like that.

vaksel• 18 years ago

The problem with ethics, is that noone really cares about them. The consumer really doesn't do the research, so even the slimiest businesses continue to operate.

There needs to be more consequences for being unethical...then maybe people would think about cheating and lying to millions

juanpablo• 18 years ago

Do you care?

unalone5• 18 years ago

What sorts of consequences would you introduce? It's tough to figure out a deal that doesn't hurt anybody innocent in the process.

Good guys finish...

Related Stories