Mediocre people talk, they have to justify what they couldn’t achieve. A genius will just observe and let his work do the talking. Have you observed this in your companies?
Why do we support the underdog? When India plays a cricket match with Pakistan, most support Pakistan, may be because they’re considered the underdogs. When Sri Lanka played the finals in a T20 or 50 over World Cups, we were not so sad to lose to the West Indies or Pakistan. Because they were the underdogs at that point in time. It hurts when we lose to Australia or India, or does it?
Is this a Sri Lankan mentality or a general liking for underdogs. Does this extend towards supporting mediocrity? I think it’s human. Blaise Pascal the French philosopher probably explained this behaviour as, “Nothing is as approved as mediocrity, the majority has established it and it fixes its’ fangs on whatever gets beyond it either way.”
I have observed, many bosses defending mediocrity because they consider their people as underdogs or disadvantaged due to some imaginary reason! The best performers get little talk time, because the results they’ve achieved talk for them. Sometimes these bosses go on to explain how talented and good those mediocre performers are. My explanation to people who question such behaviour with frustration is similar to a quote by Andrew Carnegie; “People who are unable to motivate themselves must be content with mediocrity, no matter how impressive their other talents.”
Remember, There’s a lot of mediocrity being celebrated which means a lot of excellent work being ignored. My formula for the exceptional workers is, when you’ve exceeded the goals set for you, redefine that achievement as average or mediocre and look forward to the next year to exceed what you thought was exceptional for the year. This way you can keep yourself motivated and positive, rather than being disappointed and disgruntled with those who are governing the company.