If you want extraordinary success, you need extraordinary focus.
We all heard from the best entrepreneurs, the most successful businessmen, and the internet gurus that if we want to be successful, you need to have one goal, focus on one single objective and be super dedicated to it.
But do we all actually have or want the same definition of success?
Does single achievement automatically mean maximum fulfillment?
There is a difference between:
being the best in the world
being excellent
being exceptional
being very good
being good enough to create the life you want
And society tends to collapse all four into one hierarchy.
Someone might say: “Why are you doing three things? You'll never become the GOAT at any of them. I’ll just be good or average…'‘
But what if the goal is not master everything that we do?
And the person's answer could simply be:
“I don't want to be the GOAT.”
Someone might prefer to be:
a very good musician
a successful entrepreneur
a decent painter
an involved parent
a wonderful partner
an amazing friend
someone who travels extensively
someone who wants to experience Life
rather than sacrifice all of those things to become the absolute best musician alive.
One option is not better than the other. They simply have different definitions of a fulfilling life.
Let’s compare two different mindsets:
#1: The MJ’s
Either I refer to Michael Jackson or Michael Jordan, they are the absolute GOAT’s.
. They pursued mastery extremely intensely.
They had no other competitor than their own expended creativity and had no limits.
. Their identities became inseparable from their craft.
Beyond becoming kings, they became GOAT’s
. They were obsessive about details.
Training, repetitions, extreme discipline, drastic choices, perfectionism, sacrifices, single focus, were major parts of their work. Extraordinary results generally require extraordinary levels of commitment.
. They were competing against an invisible standard.
They had no other competition than their own imagination so they pushed their own limit very hard and beyond everything anyone could have think of.
#2: The explorers
Questlove or Donald Glover aka Childish Gambino
?uestlove is a drummer, producer, DJ, author, filmmaker, entrepreneur, educator and chef. And that's what fascinates me about him is that his different careers coexist. Music feeds his writing, writing feeds his cultural work, food becomes another way of bringing people together, filmmaking becomes another way of telling stories. His curiosity seems bigger than any single job title. And he masters all of his fields.
Childish Gambino (for me Danny Glover is still the reference of the Lethal Weapon) is an actor, musician, writer, producer, comedian, director. He's built a life around being marvelous across several creative disciplines.
And that's arguably the point: his multidisciplinary identity isn't a failure to choose. The combination is the thing.
Multidisciplinary doesn't automatically mean unfocused and single-focused doesn't automatically mean successful.
There are people who have one obsession and become miserable. There are people who have one strong goal and are excellent. There are people with five interests who feel completely alive. There are also multidisciplinary people who use their different disciplines to feed each other.
Sometimes the intersection is the competitive advantage.
And there's a beautiful distinction there:
Multidisciplinary ≠ mediocre.
Pros and cons
The single-project approach has obvious advantages. Focusing on one discipline often leads to faster progress, deeper expertise and a clearer identity. It can make positioning easier. People know exactly what you do and what you are known for. This type of focus can also increase the chances of reaching exceptional levels of mastery, since time, energy and attention are concentrated on one goal. However, this path comes with its own trade-offs: building your life around one pursuit can create pressure, increase the risk of obsession or burnout, and require giving up other interests, experiences and possibilities along the way. And let’s be honest, it requires a lot of sacrifices.
On the other hand, a multi-project approach offers: variety, stimulation and the opportunity for different passions to feed one another. Skills developed in one area can unexpectedly strengthen another, creating connections that a specialist might never see. Having several projects can also mean multiple sources of income and less dependence on a single career path. For many people, this way of living simply feels more complete and more aligned with who they are. But multidisciplinarity also has its challenges: progress can be slower, priorities can become blurred and there is always the risk of spreading oneself too thin. Managing several ambitions at once requires structure, discipline and an ability to accept that not every project will advance at the same speed. Your mind can also be all over the place, you might have hard time to define priorities. And something you can lose your red-thread, be dispersed in different projects, overwhelmed and risks of freezing because you just don’t know what to do since you have so much going on.
Neither path is inherently better. The real question is not whether one should focus on one thing or many, but: what kind of life am I trying to build, and what trade-offs am I willing to make to build it?
The problem isn't having multiple projects. The problem is having multiple projects that have no relationship, no hierarchy and no capacity.
What kind of life am I trying to build? (not me but you! maybe me too…)
If your dream is to become the number one, then yes, your life probably needs extraordinary focus.
If your dream is to build a beautiful, interesting, financially comfortable life where you get to explore several things you're passionate about, perhaps becoming the best isn't the objective.
Being very good might actually be enough.
And there is something liberating about admitting that.
Not everyone needs to be Michael Jordan.
Not everyone needs to be Michael Jackson.
And there’s nothing wrong wanting to be the best, the greatest or the GOAT.
Some people just want to play the game, make beautiful things, build businesses, create experiences, travel, learn, love, experiment—and be very good at several of them. That isn't lack of ambition.
And some people want to make history, want to be THE reference and have their name everywhere. And that’s admirable.
It may simply be a different ambition.
And maybe, being fully YOU makes you the GOAT…
So what are you actually trying to build?
A life organized around becoming exceptional at one thing?
Or a life that gives you room to become very good at several things?
I’d love to read your answer in the comment section^^
Aight, I’m OUT!
✌🏽🫶🏽🎤
