Beliefs, Character Traits, and Skills

Like many people, I’ve followed Alex Hormozi for years.

I don’t consume as much of his content anymore because it has naturally become more mass-market. I understand why—reaching a broader audience supports his current goals—but I still miss some of the older gems.

One of the best was a framework that said nearly everything about a person’s performance could be reduced to three categories:

If you’ve read enough business books, you eventually realize that many popular frameworks were taken from somewhere else, repackaged, branded, and explained to a new audience.

That isn’t a criticism. We all do it.

But I haven’t seen this particular framework discussed in many other places.

Hormozi has since said that he now views everything as a skill because beliefs and character traits can also be trained. I understand his reasoning, but I still prefer separating the three.

For me, this is easily one of the five most useful frameworks I’ve encountered—for personal development, hiring, and training people inside my businesses.

It is useful because it helps explain why someone—and most of the time, that someone is you—isn’t doing what they should be doing or achieving what they should theoretically be capable of achieving.

Here are three examples from each category.

I like this framework because it reveals problems that often remain hidden beneath the surface.

The reality is that you are frequently only as strong as your weakest category.

You can—and in most cases should—rate the three categories independently.

Someone’s beliefs might be a 7 out of 10. Their character traits might also be a 7. But if their skills are only a 2, their overall level of success may remain close to a 2.

Consider a more specific example.

Imagine someone with excellent beliefs:

Now imagine that this person also has excellent skills:

But they are severely lacking in a few important character traits:

Sadly, this person probably won’t be very successful.

They might achieve a fraction of their potential, but their weak character traits will continue to place a ceiling on everything else.

It doesn’t matter that they have 10-out-of-10 beliefs and 10-out-of-10 skills.

Their character traits will always hold them back.

This describes a lot of people I’ve known and worked with. One of the three categories is clearly limiting them.

Sometimes all three categories are holding them back, but that is a topic for another day.

This problem affects all of us because one of these categories will almost always be the current bottleneck.

That bottleneck can also change over time.

As you grow, you need different and better beliefs. You need stronger character traits. You need new and more advanced skills.

The beliefs, traits, and skills that take you from zero to $100,000 are different from those that take you from $100,000 to $1 million.

The ones that take you from $1 million to $10 million are different again.

For me personally, I would say my character traits are currently the biggest bottleneck preventing me from reaching the next level.

The flow looks something like this:

This could almost be a separate newsletter.

For many years, I viewed these as two different ideas. But over the past 18 months, I’ve realized that they can be combined into something more useful than either concept on its own.

The second concept is consciously and deliberately creating a 2.0 version of yourself.

For most people, their biggest problem is themselves.

They already have almost everything they need to succeed. They simply don’t consistently do anything with it.

You can confirm this by doing a little consulting.

People usually have all the information they need.

They have examples to follow. They have access to the technology, tools, courses, software, and experts.

But still, nothing happens.

The only reasonable conclusion is that they, in their current form, are not yet capable of producing the result they want.

Something about their beliefs, character traits, or skills is holding them back.

I’ve heard different teachers and authors explain this using the metaphor of a thermostat.

Everyone has an internal setting for the level of success, income, happiness, fitness, or performance they consider normal.

When life gets too good—when the temperature rises too far above that setting—they often self-sabotage and bring themselves back down.

When life gets too bad—when the temperature falls too far below their normal setting—they suddenly work harder and bring themselves back up.

It works in both directions.

To permanently change the result, you have to change the thermostat.

You have to consciously move from the current version of yourself to the next version.

Take two pieces of paper.

In the middle of each piece, draw a simple stick-figure version of yourself.

On one, write your name followed by “1.0.”

On the other, write your name followed by “2.0.”

Mine would be:

You can obviously use your own name.

The important thing is that you complete the 2.0 version first.

Start with your goals.

Then reverse-engineer the beliefs, character traits, and skills that a person would need to achieve those goals.

Your 2.0 version is the person you need to become to create the life and results you want.

What would that person believe?

How would that person behave?

What character traits would they demonstrate consistently?

What skills would they have developed?

I’ve completed this exercise many times during different periods of my life. At this point, I’m probably working on Matthew 7.0.

Your ideal version should be relatively easy to describe once your goals are clear.

The difficult part comes next.

After defining your 2.0 version, turn your attention to your current self.

Look only at the evidence from the previous six months.

Not your intentions.

Not what you believe you are capable of.

Not what you plan to start doing next week.

Your actual behavior and track record.

Write down:

Then compare the two versions.

Sometimes the gap between who you currently are and who you would need to become to achieve your goals is staggering.

That is not necessarily a bad thing.

Truthfully, if there is no meaningful difference between the two versions, your goals may not be ambitious or compelling enough.

Once you’ve completed both sides of the exercise, the work becomes clear.

You now have to make the beliefs, character traits, and skills of your 2.0 self true in real life rather than leaving them on a piece of paper.

That is the entire game.

Define the person who can achieve the goal.

Identify the gap between that person and who you have demonstrated yourself to be.

Then close the gap.

Here is a link to the worksheet if you’d like to print it out and complete the exercise yourself (link)

Talk later,

Matt