Everyone is confronted daily with the challenge of becoming a defeatist, a grubber or legacist. The selection does not permanently describe one’s character but is a choice until death. Only momentarily or upon death can one be permanently described as a defeatist, grubber or legacist. Thanks to life, we have an opportunity of becoming whomever we wish while alive. By Nimroth Gwetsa, 30 October 2021.

To foster common understanding, let us agree with Dictionary.com’s definitions of a defeatist as a person expecting or excessively ready to accept failure, and a gruber as someone determined to acquire or amass something, especially unscrupulously. Let us also accept the UrbanDictionary.com’s definition of a legacist as a person striving to help others through acts of kindest leaving lasting impression or impact on their community, country or the world.

By these definitions, we have an apathetic, one in it mainly for the money and one more interested in ensuring one’s life serving a lasting meaningful purpose. These choices confront us as our daily struggle and we do not permanently hold onto our positions. Though one’s history reflects one’s natural character inclination, one can change for the better or worse daily.

For now, let us defer discussion of the defeatist for last.

I do not know about you but being a legacist is a better and fulfilling choice than all others. I do not know whether this is an approach issue of the chicken or egg nature, or a fundamental one of success or failure in choosing between pursuing money first and all shall follow, or concerning oneself with becoming and money shall follow. If anything, perhaps we could draw lessons from ancient wisdom.

Ancient wisdom tells us that if you plant a fruit tree from a seed or seedling stage, remove all its blossoms in the first three years to prevent it from producing fruits, then you will have plentiful harvest from year four onward.

Bean-counters would not accept the advice, but lament the waste incurred and require an early return from their investment as much as possible. From this analogy, we can separate the grubber from the legacist.

The grubber would not wish to pass up any opportunity to make money, if at all, and may not wish to prevent the tree from producing fruit whenever it can. One reason for such a stance could be that tomorrow can take care of itself or that there is no guarantee of life tomorrow and that today must be seized.

The legacist may argue that it is the principle and not expediency that counts, and that it is not always about oneself and one’s gratification, but the difference one is prepared to make for others. In that thinking, the legacist may wish to resist and curb personal desires by adhering to the three-year abstinence to attain the expected bounty.

Good reasons can be advanced on either choice. The ability to live with the consequence of whatever decision one has made is important. But living a life full of regrets is certainly unhelpful and ruinous.

I choose to stick my neck out to side with the legacist’s stance.

Indeed, from the perspective of the grubbist’s argument, one can seize the opportunity of making money quickly and using it to advance other lucrative causes. That may well be the case, but many issues currently ignored, could arise.

For instance, ancient wisdom reveals that fruits produced in the first three years are usually inedible owing to their bitterness, or watery nature. This then means the opportunity to make money may be reduced as such produce may only be suitable as animal food or reusable waste. The damage, the wise tell us, to the development of the tree is immeasurable. Early fruits gained from failure to remove the blossom to prevent the tree from producing could strain its roots and stem, stunting its growth and strengthening resulting in less produce and unwholesome fruits in future.

Such would not be a problem to the grubber if they were to depart from this life before the first four years of the tree’s development because they would not have to witness the decline afterward. But they would have not advanced the life of their successors, for, they may need to start afresh and possibly lag the legacist’s and their successors’ performance to their disadvantage.

This argument is the same as that about weaning infants to start them earlier on solids to prevent their incessant cries, than letting them wean at the right time when their age and weight are appropriately at the right stage for introduction of such solids. The long-term effect of cutting corners is often dire, resulting in further health issues than the convenience gained from stopping those incessant annoying cries.

The benefits of waiting, as it would be the case with the legacist’s acceptance of ancient wisdom, are self-evident. Self-denial in the early stages for bountiful produce that may benefit many later in life has some merit. If indeed the aim is to gain earlier, surely there are many and better avenues available of achieving that than of taking the process that naturally requires that time be invested before rewards can be reaped. The evidence of bountifulness supporting such wisdom is available for verification. One can easily take a picture of the first year’s blossom, compare it with the second year’s to confirm the increased produce and worthiness of continuing the strategy to the third year.

Again, if early gain was the target, there are other better ways of achieving that goal than using one requiring time and patience. The benefits of a bountiful produce, however, are apparent and need no further discussion.

The defeatist needs our support and not condemnation to move out of the undesirable situation. Many experiences and causes could have resulted in them becoming defeatist. At best, we should regard the defeatist as one whose vision has had its light extinguished. Without light, darkness sets in. The least we could do for them is offering or holding a candle to let them see possibilities of a better future with a rekindled vision and enthusiasm. Destructiveness is refusal to welcome the new light shone and support given, but insisting on remaining a defeatist.

What do all these mean in business?

Everybody is a leader of their lives, and leaders need to push themselves and encourage others to becoming legacists. Leaders should avoid prematurely attributing wrong motives to others or disempowering others by hoarding power, thus hindering creation of as many legacists as possible under their watch, but enviously wishing to remain the only “legacist” available.

Being others centered, it follows that a legacist cannot be an autocrat and maker of all decisions, especially when there are other emerging legacists within the organisation.

Let us empower others for our increased empowerment and bountiful produce.