Radical Optimism Redux
Photo by DS stories on Pexels.
About 7 years ago I came to the conclusion that the secret sauce to success in life - however you define it - is radical optimism. Since then I’ve touched on the topic repeatedly - in my professional life, speaking about it at conferences and on podcasts, and bringing it up in my blog posts. But I’m yet to complete the book I planned on it, mostly because I let life get in the way: the pandemic, a series of intense jobs and projects, divorce and other family challenges, and perimenopause brain.
That stops today.
I’d like to ask a favour, if I may? I want to test an overarching structure with you.
As I set out in my SDinGov talk, I think optimism gets a bad rap. Say the word in a room full of senior leaders and you can practically hear eyes rolling at the perceived naïvité.
I know why: we've all worked with the relentlessly positive leader who responds to genuine concerns with "let's focus on the positives!" as if naming a problem is a character flaw. That's not optimism — that's a liability. It's toxic positivity, and it drives good people up the wall.
But here's the thing I keep coming back to: pessimism doesn't work either. Cynicism might feel intellectually rigorous — and in some organisations it's practically a badge of honour — but it doesn't actually help you get anything done. It just gives you a very articulate reason for not trying.
I have faith we can do better. So I'm writing the book I want to read, in the belief that others will find it useful too. My draft as it stands is in three sections, just like my talk was — the optimistic self, the optimistic team, and the optimistic organisation. Each one has different implications at each level, and each one comes with practical tools.
The thing I’d like your help with is structure within these sections - I’m playing with splitting it into four lenses, based on the behavioural science behind it all. This is the framework I want to stress-test with you — so read them with a critical eye.
The four lenses
What you believe
Your explanatory style — how you account for setbacks. Do you treat failure as permanent ("this always happens"), pervasive ("it ruins everything"), and personal ("I'm useless")? Or as temporary, specific, and something you can influence? Psychologist Marty Seligman's foundational work on learned helplessness and learned optimism found that some people simply couldn’t be made to feel helpless, no matter what he did. The difference wasn't personality — it was how they explained events to themselves.
But it's also about agency. Your confidence that what you do actually matters. The difference between what I think of as planners (who focus on what they can do to influence the situation) and spanners (who spend their energy worrying about the things they can't control). Both are responding to the same reality. One of them is moving forward.
What you notice
Where you put your attention shapes everything. Eye-tracking research shows that pessimists literally spend more time looking at unpleasant cues. Realistic optimists don't ignore the bad stuff — they notice it, reckon with it, and then choose not to stew on it.
This is about self-talk, reframing, and the stories we tell about our experience. And it scales. At team level, it's about what gets airtime in your meetings — do you spend 90% of your standup on blockers and 10% on progress, or the other way round? At organisational level, it's about what stories get repeated in the corridor, in onboarding, in the pub. Are they stories of what went wrong and who's to blame? Or stories of what people overcame and what they learned? Most organisations have no idea how lopsided their storytelling is.
What you expect
The big thing here is the Pygmalion effect. What you expect of people shapes what they deliver — reliably, measurably, and often without you realising you're doing it. Leaders who believe their teams are capable get better performance than leaders who don't, even when the teams are equally talented. And it works in reverse: low expectations become self-fulfilling prophecies too.
This lens also covers psychological safety — the expectation that it's safe to take risks and raise problems without punishment. And growth mindset — the expectation that ability can develop, that failure is information rather than verdict. What your culture teaches people to expect when things go wrong is one of the most powerful levers you have as a leader.
What you do
The final lens is what you do. Realistic optimism is not a passive state. You feel like you're going to succeed because you have a plan, a roadmap and a refusal to yield — not because you've wished it hard enough. It's believing you'll run that marathon because you did the training.
Don't visualise success — visualise the steps you need to take to make it happen. Tools in here include mental contrasting, pre-mortems, banded mastery, iteration. The habit of taking action, especially when things are uncertain. Collecting the "yeah-buts" and using them to clarify your goals and manage your risks, rather than letting them stop you in your tracks.
Where you come in
I think this framing works - but I’d love to stress test it with you.
Think about the most realistically optimistic leader you've worked with. The one who could name the hard truth and still make you believe things could get better. Which of these four lenses were they strongest on? Are there lenses I'm missing? Does this framework match your experience — or does it feel like it's straining to fit?
I'd genuinely love to hear. I'm at the stage where my ideas are still quite loosely held - conversations are more valuable than convictions. Drop me a message, leave a comment, or grab me for a coffee.