Going for Gold

Published: Aug 17 , 2012
Author: Alan Smith

One such sport was hockey. When younger I used to play quite a bit of rugby, quite a physical game in itself, but nothing in comparison to hockey. The ball seemingly made of concrete flies around at ridiculous speeds whilst opponents try to take your head off with a stick. Or so it appeared to the uninitiated.

The GB women's hockey team had one goal in mind. To win the Gold medal. Their utter focus and determination honed over four years (if not more) of preparation was in coming away from the Olympics on top.

Sadly it was not to be, and having lost in the semi final to the eventual winners, the tears streaming down their faces created a lump in my otherwise manly throat.

Heart broken I am sure, the captain Kate Walsh, decided to revise their objective (a wise thing to do if the objective is no longer possible) and create a new must achieve position, which was to win Bronze. They subsequently did with all the gusto that their new stretch goal required.

For those of us this week who have 18 year olds as children, relations or friends we should keep this lesson in mind. A Level results create elation and disappointment across the country as these young adults come to terms with the next steps in their lives.

Those unfortunates, who did not quite make the grades that allow their first choice, now need to take a step back, recalibrate and revise their objectives to make the very best of the change in circumstance.

Churchill defined success as the ability to go from failure to failure without any loss of enthusiasm.

Commercially sometimes we are unable to achieve our intended goals. That is not to say that we shouldn't have them, or that we should not strive for them with ambition. But if we realize for whatever reason they are unattainable we have be able to refocus our efforts on the best possible outcome.

Alan Smith, Scotwork UK.


SHARE

blogAuthor

About the author:

Alan Smith
No bio is currently avaliable

Latest Blog:

Muck Shift

Just when is a deal not a deal…? I heard this story from a friend of mine the other week; there are some lessons to be learned! So, my pal is a developer and is building some houses on what is essentially a square site. Two sides of the square can be accessed from the road in a neighboring housing estate and the other two are beside a field owned by another developer. There is a huge pile of muck to shift before the actual building project; this phase is known in the trade – and not unreasonably - as a "muck-shift"! As there will be 80 -100 lorries coming in and out each day for 6 weeks, it was considered more convenient to access the site over the field, so an approach was made to the developer to discuss the terms under which he would allow access. This is a standard arrangement and the deal typically is that the field would be returned to the owner in its original condition. Developer makes a bit of money, where otherwise he wouldn’t; homeowners in the adjoining estate are less inconvenienced; builder does not need to spend money cleaning the streets and getting them back to a usable state at the end of the project. Win-win.

Latest Tweet:





United States
973.428.1991
usa@scotwork.com
Follow us
cpd.png
voty2016_sign_gold.png