Do Hard Things: Why We Get Resilience Wrong and the Surprising Science of Real Toughness

by Steve Magness

The authoritarian style creates the appearance of discipline without actually fostering it.

real toughness is experiencing discomfort or distress, leaning in, paying attention, and creating space to take thoughtful action. It’s maintaining a clear head to be able to make the appropriate decision. Toughness is navigating discomfort to make the best decision you can. And research shows that this model of toughness is more effective at getting results than the old one.

Toughness is having the space to make the right choice under discomfort.

TOUGHNESS MAXIM Real toughness is experiencing discomfort or distress, leaning in, paying attention, and creating space to take thoughtful action. It’s navigating discomfort to make the best decision you can.

Dissociation is the feeling of being detached, as if your mind has hit the eject button to get you through the experience. It can be separated into three categories: amnesia, depersonalization (feeling detached from self), and derealization (detaching from your surroundings). Our perceptions change; we forget, zone out, and feel incapable of action. It’s an extreme involuntary coping strategy, a last-ditch effort for survival.

Stress inoculation doesn’t work unless you have acquired the skills to navigate the environment you will encounter. As sports psychologist Brian Zuleger told me, “Telling people to relax doesn’t work unless you’ve taught people how to actually relax.

You have to teach the skill before it can be applied.” Throwing people in the deep end doesn’t work unless they’ve been taught the basics of how to swim.

Toughness isn’t a sorting exercise. We need to teach the skills to handle adversity. Development is not merely putting people through challenging times.

When researchers evaluated soldiers who were able to keep a clear head during extreme stress, they found that the soldiers: appraised stress as a challenge instead of a threat, thanks in large part to a better assessment of what they encountered; utilized a diverse array of methods to cope with stress, demonstrating a high degree of cognitive flexibility; processed internal signals better, without reacting to them; and didn’t react to negative stimuli but instead were able to change their physiological state.

tougher individuals are able to perceive stressful situations as challenges instead of threats. A challenge is something that’s difficult, but manageable. On the other hand, a threat is something we’re just trying to survive, to get through.

ability to quickly and accurately assess the situation and their ability to cope with it.

“What’s the point?” mode. The task will be so far outside of our capabilities that there’s no point in using our full reserve to take on the challenge. We’re doomed before we start. Our ability to be “tough” and handle adversity starts well before we even encounter any difficulty. It starts with embracing the reality of the situation and what you’re capable of.

TOUGHNESS MAXIM Our appraisal of a situation as a threat or as a challenge depends on the perceived demands of that stressor versus our perceived abilities to handle them. Do we have the resources to handle the demands?

“Everyone wears a mask. We carry around a facade, projecting an outer image of who we want to be. But when you are under stress, that fades away and you’re left with what’s underneath. Stress exposes you.”

“When there’s a difference between what you project and what you are capable of, it all crumbles under stressful situations. If, on the other hand, you’re honest with yourself, and acknowledge what your strengths and weaknesses are, what you’re capable of and what might scare you, then you can come to terms with what you’re facing and deal with it. The you walking the streets and the you stranded in a jungle aren’t that much different. So you’re able to assess the situation with clear eyes and expectations instead of trying to live up to some false standard.

TOUGHNESS MAXIM Embrace reality. Accurate appraisal of demands + accurate appraisal of our abilities.

when athletes warm up by “doing what they like,” they alter their hormonal state in a positive manner.

The closer you are to a performance, the more you want to prime with what you’re good at. Reviewing mistakes, working on weaknesses, telling yourself that you “can’t hit the slider, so watch for it” backfires when you’re on deck. Those are items you work on far before it’s time to step into the batter’s box.

Wilt recognized that despite reaching great heights, Edelen had a glaring insecurity. His obsessiveness—manifested in high training volumes and tracking everything imaginable before the quantified self movement had made it trendy—was also holding him back. He didn’t have the confidence to step back, to rest.

They began to see the competition as a sign of a threat, not a challenge. And most importantly, when confidence was low, their behavioral responses followed their cognition and emotions. They were timid, indecisive, and withdrawn, and they lacked that extra bit of fight they normally possessed. Despite being some of the most accomplished athletes in the world, low confidence was like kryptonite, turning their cognition, emotion, and thoughts against them.

When our confidence is low, our toolbox shrinks.

when confidence is high, we experience the opposite. We’re able to completely focus on the task at hand. We experience positive emotions: enjoyment, calm, and excitement. Our body language shifts, and we feel in control of the situation.

TOUGHNESS MAXIM Confidence is a filter, tinting how we see the challenges before us and our ability to handle them.

Chiu reported, “If an overconfident student chooses a book that is too hard—such as The Lord of the Rings rather than Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone—he or she might stop reading after a few pages and let it sit on a bookshelf. In contrast, a more self-aware student is more likely to finish an easier book and continue reading more books.”

Cultivating fake confidence creates insecurity for our minds to exploit.

While we envision tough competitors and executives as having an unshakable belief in themselves, the reality is that the best way to be prepared for a challenge isn’t bravado but tragic optimism, a sense of reality in the short run but hope over the long haul.

confidence simply means having security in knowing that you can accomplish whatever is within your capabilities.

To develop true, inner confidence, there are four steps: Lower the bar. Raise the floor. Shed perfection. Embrace who you are. Trust your training. Trust yourself. Develop a quiet ego.

developed the confidence to know that X performance is repeatable. That as long as we do what’s in our control, we can achieve a certain standard, no matter the circumstances,”

Confidence doesn’t come from doing the work out of fear or neuroticism—to practice because you are afraid to lose or fail. When fear drives the motivational ship, then insecurity pervades. When the work is done in the name of getting better, of enjoying the process, of searching for mastery of the craft, then confidence gradually grows. A feeling that “I’ve been here before, I’m prepared for this challenge.”

The result might not always end up as hoped for, but doing the work provides a secure confidence founded in something concrete.

Michael Jordan, once said, “If you have doubt or concern about a shot, or feel the ‘pressure’ of that shot, it’s because you haven’t practiced it enough.

gain confidence, put in the work from a place of growth, not fear. Boldness is earned, not assumed.

A quiet ego is about keeping ourself in balance—coming to terms with the need for confidence, but being keenly aware of the strengths and weaknesses of ourselves and our situation. It’s being open and receptive to others, instead of defensive and closed off. It’s having the ability to zoom out, gain perspective, and understand that a short-term loss is often part of a long-term gain.

Those who were better able to integrate instead of compartmentalize were tougher and better at “thriving in adverse circumstances.”

Take away control, and animals resign themselves to their fate. They give up. Even if the path to avoiding despair is right in front of them.

Give-up-itis might not always lead to death, but the feelings of apathy when we lack control are real and frequent.

Psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl noted that when he was in Auschwitz, another prisoner told him that to increase his chances of survival he should do two simple things: shave and stand tall. In other words, control what you can.

Leach believes that bringing some sort of normalcy to perilous situations “requires an appraisal that the person has, at least, some control over his situation, has not accepted mental defeat.” He goes on to conclude, “That sensation of choice indicates a reversal of mental defeat and the reimposition of some personal control over the situation which is a key factor in recovery. . . . [Give-up-itis] is the clinical expression of mental defeat; in particular, it is a pathology of a normal, passive coping response.”

Our level of control changes how we respond to stress.

When we lack control, our stress spikes. When we have a sense that we can impact the situation, our cortisol response is dampened. Control doesn’t alter just our hormonal response but also the experience that accompanies stress.

TOUGHNESS MAXIM Our level of control changes how we respond to stress. When we have a sense of control, our alarm is quieter and easier to shut off.

The ability to choose is not just related to persistence and performance. It is deeply ingrained and required for being a normally functioning human being.

According to self-determination theory, the level of autonomy, or “the desire to be causal agents of one’s own life,” is intricately tied to our well-being. It serves as one of the three basic psychological needs that allow us to flourish and bolster our motivation.

According to Bandura, self-efficacy “reflects confidence in the ability to exert control over one’s own motivation, behavior, and social environment.”

When life feels like it’s spinning out of control, or like the task you have in front of you is insurmountable, it’s easy to default to hopelessness. To “What’s the point?” That’s natural. Your body evolved to conserve energy. We need to train hopefulness. To clear the path to continue. It doesn’t take big heroic efforts to train hope. Small signals that you are in control, that you can have an impact, will be enough to turn our prefrontal cortex back on.

Too often, we get stuck in the rut of apathy, because we haven’t flexed our hopeful muscle. Small actions that remind you that you have a choice go a long way to training the ability to put your brain back online.

researchers Lauren Leotti, Sheena Iyengar, and Kevin Ochsner hammer home the importance of the need for control. In their conclusion, they state, “The evidence suggests the desire to exercise control, and thus, the desire to make choices, is paramount for survival.” They go on to summarize their findings: “The desire for control is not something we acquire through learning, but rather, is innate, and thus likely biologically motivated. We are born to choose.” We have a basic underlying need to have some semblance of control over whatever we’re tackling.

Constraining and controlling workplaces take that away, nudging us toward quitting at the first sign of discomfort. Autonomy is the switch that allows us to persist.

In Foucault’s conceptualization, power was utilized to regulate time, space, and effort. In the political environment, he was critical of the effects of power on the individual. He believed that power influenced control, and when power was relinquished, the individual became passive and docile.