What If We Subtracted: Self-Help

Why we need more than rigid boundaries to live and lead well

Yes, today’s self-help is teaching everyone to be a jerk.

Emma Goldberg captured it in the New York Times piece that Zach Mercurio just flagged for me — and it is a real problem.

In a typical overcorrection, we’ve (rightly) moved away from the masochistic, ableist, and otherwise problematic people-pleasing scripts of the twentieth century… only to land in a culture that condones callousness at best, cruelty at worst.

Maybe you can tell I have a bit of a POV here 🤨 — but it’s exactly why I talk about leading in three dimensions.

It is not sustainable to focus narrowly on the ME dimension of success or happiness. That path quickly becomes lonely, alienating, and meaningless. (Seen any of that around lately?) Also: it is very un-fun to do life as a lone wolf.

And yet, I recognize the problem these self-help folks are reacting to. It is real. Which is why I advocate for strategic subtraction — doing less, but not with rigid boundaries for “me time,” “not giving a f*$k,” or refusing a vaccine and undoing decades of progress in public health.

We absolutely must care for ourselves — I’ve learned the oxygen mask lesson personally and painfully. But it has to be multidimensional: caring for ME, WE, and WORLD at once. Here’s how I teach leaders to do that → Three Dimensions, One Life.

And we can’t waste time. The stakes are high. We’re already seeing the pendulum’s overcorrection:

• unthinking “return to office” mandates that chase top talent away,

• the outlawing of equity-minded practices that optimize human potential.

So: rant over. Let’s get back to it. Let’s care for ourselves with the activities that actually build sustainable wellbeing — strategic, long-term, holistic.

P.S. If you’re not sure whether you’re drifting into “jerk territory” or just doing the right kind of subtraction… I built a quick diagnostic for that. Takes 5 minutes, surprisingly fun → try it here!