Free Necessary Endings by Henry Cloud Page A

someone else—often a sibling, sometimes a parent—who was not pul ing his load; over time they just got used to doing that. Recently I talked to a woman who said she remained too long in situations and relationships that were not good for her based on a childhood map that was created when she covered for an alcoholic mother by raising her younger siblings.
    There are certain benefits to this behavior in the short term, but the long-term consequences far outweigh them. One consequence is that relationships and projects are al owed to go on far past the point when they should have been “fixed, closed, or sold.” As a result, goals are not reached and potential is not realized, not to mention the misery of the one who is doing al the work.
    Believing That Ending It Means I Failed

    Leaders, like most good people, persevere. It is one of the most fundamental character strengths in the human repertoire. Life and success depend on it, in every area, from performance success to relationship success to even our physical health and wel -being. Especial y with winners and high performers, quitting is never an option.
    But there is a toxic version of not quitting. It happens when the label of “quitting” in the big sense is equated with stopping a particular goal or endeavor. In other words, if you quit any one thing, you are a quitter instead of being wise. For example, the map says that ending a particular business strategy means you are a quitter. Or giving up on a relationship means being a quitter. “If you shut down this project, or quit trying with this individual person, you are a quitter, and that is terrible,” is what the internal map says. Quitting is just bad, period. Always, anytime, anywhere.
    Furthermore, the label gets attached not to the project or the individual case, but the self. “I am a quitter,” is what goes through the person’s head, instead of “I decided to fold on this particular hand. It was stupid to go forward.” One of the most important aspects to any high performance is the ability to separate one’s personhood from any particular result. Quarterback Peyton Manning does not think he is a loser if he throws one interception or loses one game. His identity is separate from any one result. Likewise, successful leaders are bigger than any individual outcome; their sense of self-worth doesn’t depend on its having to work. Their whole self-image is not at stake. They are separate from “the deal.”
    If leaders are not separate from a particular outcome, then there is real trouble. I have seen many leaders drive companies downward in a relentless, stubborn drive to make a particular vision or strategy succeed, or even a person, so they would not feel like or be labeled a failure. In reality they became much more of a failure because of their failure to fail wel . Failing wel means ending something that is not working and choosing to do something else better.
    Psychology researchers Charles Carver and Mark Scheier make the distinction between “giving up effort” and “giving up commitment.” They point out how important it is to realize that giving up on some particular commitment doesn’t necessarily mean you have to give up on effort.
    Instead, that effort can be redirected to another goal worthy of your resources. But some people have maps in their heads that say, “Any giving up is bad.” This belief keeps them from endings that should happen. See: C. Carver and M. Sheier, “Three Human Strengths,” in A Psychology of Human Strengths : Fundamental Questions and Future Directions for a Positive Psychology , eds. L. Aspinwal and U. Staudinger, (Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 2002), pp. 87–102. Sometimes it makes sense to quit a particular project or goal. It does not mean you are a “quitter.”
    Misunderstood Loyalty

    Our most powerful internal maps are our relational ones. In fact, our earliest mappings of the world come from our relationships. This