cynicaltoss

I'm assuming "success" as discussed in the article is the standard metric and measured in currency.

Personally I've seen it all (to use characters from my story):

- The small town family lawyer who is miserable and feels screwed that they somehow couldn't or didn't want to swim with the sharks.

- The partner at the firm on his third divorce, with kids who won't talk to him, and living in constant worry of the various legally or morally dubious things they've done. Ulcers, high blood pressure, and substance abuse disorder included.

- The opposite of the other who's stayed in touch with "that guy from law school" who is perfectly happy and content only to look at the other and feel pity for how miserable the other's life must be (and often is).

I know all of them and it's pretty strange... Especially when someone will say "Yeah, XYZ is a great guy and good friend but you know... Don't ever trust him." -or- conversely "Yeah what happened to ABC was strange... Guy kind of flaked out. He seems to be doing ok, I guess."

We seem to be much better at measuring and discussing "success" than actual happiness.

EDIT: typo

(Using a throwaway for soon to be obvious reasons).

After being involved in several early stage startup companies and the usual cast of characters (individual founders, angels, boards of all sorts, investors, etc) my deeply held personal belief is that after intelligence and hard work moral/ethical flexibility is the largest single factor in individual success in business.

In virtually every scenario I've been involved in the individuals that made out 10x or greater (compared to others) did so because they were willing to do things the others were not.

I suppose one could frame it as "luck" but my experience has been "making your own luck" is frequently only moderated by your own ability or willingness to lie, cheat, manipulate, and generally be as soullessly ruthless and self-serving as possible.

Consider two people. Both graduate from a top-tier law school and join a firm as junior partners. One graduate sees nothing but tax avoision, various shady legal maneuverings, high net worth senior partner infighting and politics, etc. The other sees nothing but money, power, and opportunity.

One of the junior partners is disgusted by this and leaves the firm to go back to their hometown and start a family law practice. They settle into a decent upper-middle class lifestyle.

The other junior partner stays on, climbs the ladder, and goes on to join the top X percent of the population in income and net worth.

Both are intelligent. Both worked hard. Both are "successful". However one junior partner saw people at (arguably) their worst and was disgusted by it. The other couldn't wait to really get in the game and play...

Hypothetical simple example but virtually identical to what I've seen play out continually in business.