Do you have to be a high-achiever to attain high-performance? This is a question I’ve been playing with. The personal definition of high-performance and high-achievement can vary for the individual based on what standards you have have, how much you compare, and how you define success. That’s a longer discussion that I won’t go into today. Here, you’ll read about the difference between high-performance and high-achievement.
First, let’s put a spotlight on the differences between the two. High performance is about habits/process where high achievement is about an accomplishment/outcome that is usually compared to others. You can live a high-performance life without necessarily becoming a high-achiever. An example of someone who is living a high-performance life could be someone who is consistent (and values consistency over intensity), strives to apply learnings to growth and improvement, and someone who is deliberate with their energy. A high-achiever could have accolades, but may not display a growth mindset, may not have moral or sustainable means in their process to becoming “great”, and also may be mentally or physically unhealthy because of obsessive passion towards an outcome.
In short, high achievers may sacrifice high performance habits.
You may be practicing high performance habits and never become world class in your achievements because of luck, circumstances, or even genetics. Outcomes are usually out of your control and in comparison to others. You can still live a high performance life, even without getting the desired outcome every time. While that may sound depressing, it’s the process and the work itself that partially defines who you are and what the quality and meaning of your life looks like, not the accolades and achievements.
So, do you weight the value high-performance or high-achievement?
