ency. The result of overly grandiose schemes is frequently failure. Again, it is impossible to separate the personal element from measures of success.
Success is a process by which one gains satisfaction from the optimal use of one's personal energies and skills. This personal definition of success poses two questions: how does a person know when his or her energies and skills are being optimally used?; and at what point does success ever become unsatisfactory? The successful person must learn to recognize and monitor his or her own states of tension, alertness, and anxiety. The successful person must pace him- or herself in accordance with what feels right in any given competitive situation; of course, the competitive person must have adequate feedback in order to know what "fits" competitively. This is easier said than done, however, and many motivational writers assume that people will be able to win the little wars with as much satisfaction and self-confidence as the bigger wars.
In a steady progression of success, from small attempts to larger attempts at achievement, self-confidence is easily gained. However, in a series of setbacks, or irreversible obstacles, how does a person regain enough confidence to go back to the original challenge and start over? The motivational writers surveyed challenge such personal doubt by attempting to deny the existence of the possibility of failure. When Peale writes of the power of positive thinking, he all but erases the possibility of failure, personal or otherwise. A more realistic appraisal is offered by Korda and Molloy who believe that a series of pragmatic acting or modeling steps will insure success more often than not. If a person acts successful, he will, in fact, be successful.
This authors personal definition of success was challenged by the concept that appearances can be more effective than reality. In other words, when Molloy instructs people on how to act,...