Multiplicative Success Function
Strengthen every factor that multiplies sustained professional success
- Difficulty
- Advanced
- Time to result
- ~months to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 90%
The model treats success as the product of several capabilities rather than the sum of isolated strengths. Intelligence, education, ambition, curiosity, hard work, and the ability to cooperate with people all contribute, but a serious deficiency in one can sharply restrict the value of the others. The practical implication is to stop maximizing an already strong trait while ignoring the factor that currently limits performance. A highly intelligent person with weak interpersonal judgment may need relationship practice more than additional technical study; an educated and socially skilled person may instead lack ambition or sustained effort. Use the factors as a recurring diagnostic scorecard, identify the weakest consequential multiplier, and direct development effort there before reassessing the whole system.
Origin
Nisbett discusses a formula attributed to Hans Selye and illustrates it with an exceptionally intelligent academic whose weak interpersonal ability restricted his career. Extracted from Masters in Business.
Core principles
- 01Success depends on several interacting capabilities, not intelligence alone.
- 02A severe weakness in one factor can constrain the entire system.
- 03Interpersonal ability and ambition matter alongside cognitive ability.
- 04Improvement should target the weakest consequential multiplier.
How to run it
- 1
Define the success target
Specify the concrete outcome you want and the context in which success must occur. Different goals place different demands on each multiplier.
Pro tip Use an observable outcome rather than a vague ambition.
Watch out Do not evaluate personal strengths without first defining what they must accomplish.
- 2
Score the multipliers
Assess intelligence or problem-solving ability, relevant education, ambition, curiosity, hard work, and interpersonal ability against the target.
Pro tip Support each score with recent behavioral evidence.
Watch out Avoid turning the exercise into a flattering personality profile.
- 3
Find the binding constraint
Identify which weak factor most limits the usefulness of your other strengths. Focus on the constraint that repeatedly appears in actual outcomes.
Pro tip Ask trusted colleagues where your potential most often fails to convert into results.
Watch out The lowest numerical score is not necessarily the most consequential constraint.
- 4
Design targeted practice
Choose a repeatable behavior that develops the binding constraint, such as requesting feedback, studying fundamentals, or completing focused work blocks.
Pro tip Practice in the environment where the weakness causes problems.
Watch out Consuming information without changing behavior will rarely strengthen the multiplier.
- 5
Reassess the system
Review whether the targeted change improved results and whether another factor has become the new constraint.
Pro tip Repeat the scorecard after a meaningful project or evaluation cycle.
Watch out Do not assume the same multiplier will remain limiting as responsibilities change.
In the wild
Nisbett describes a man with a tested IQ of 184 and a doctorate from a major university. Despite obvious intellectual power, he made inappropriate comments and reactions, struggled to get along with people, and obtained only middling academic appointments.
→ Weak interpersonal ability constrained the career value of exceptional intelligence and education.
A technically exceptional founder repeatedly improves the product while avoiding customer conversations. Applying the scorecard reveals that additional engineering skill is not the constraint; communication and customer understanding are. The founder schedules weekly interviews and practices concise demonstrations.
→ Targeting the weak multiplier converts technical strength into stronger adoption and revenue.
Common mistakes
Optimizing the strongest trait
People often invest further in intelligence or technical knowledge because those areas feel comfortable, even when another factor limits results.
Treating the factors as additive
A major weakness cannot always be compensated for by accumulating more strength elsewhere because the capabilities interact.
Ignoring context
The relative importance of each multiplier changes with the goal, role, and working environment.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for professionals diagnosing why strong talent has not translated into commensurate achievement.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for evaluating outcomes dominated by structural barriers, luck, or unavailable resources.
From the transcript
“Success in a science is a multiplicative function. It's intelligence times education times, ambition times, curiosity times, hard work times, the ability to get along…”
“you have to have all those things to be a successful scientist”
“the particular thing that he lacked was ability to get along with people.”
From the episode
Richard Nisbett on Flawed Reasoning and Societies (Podcast)
Richard Nisbett