Moving beyond growth mindset jargon

Whenever a tech exec shoots out the phrase “growth mindset,” I can’t help but scoff. It’s impressive how confidently they misuse it. Borrowed from the research of Stanford psychologist Carol Dweck, the term originally referred to the idea that intelligence and ability can be cultivated through effort, learning from setbacks, and perseverance. It was a framework meant to empower individuals by reframing challenges as opportunities for development. But once the concept entered the Silicon Valley lexicon, it transformed into something far more reductive, and far more convenient for those in charge. In many tech workplaces today, a growth mindset is no longer about curiosity or resilience; it is a doctrine of boundless adaptability. When leaders invoke the term, it often serves as a subtle directive to absorb rising workloads and shrinking resources while maintaining unflagging enthusiasm. This rhetorical shift allows companies to reframe structural failures (unrealistic timelines, understaffed teams, and strategic indecision) as personal hurdles for employees to “grow through.” If a project deadline is impossible, raising concerns is dismissed as a “fixed mindset.” If constant pivots leave teams disoriented, employees are told to “lean into the discomfort.” This fosters an environment of chronic dissatisfaction where professional development becomes a competitive sport and competence is never enough. In this culture, admitting a lack of expertise is no longer a factual statement; it is treated as evidence of insufficient ambition, and burnout becomes the employee’s problem to solve rather than an organizational failure to address. Dweck’s original research was intended to unlock potential through meaningful, supported effort, not to justify relentless workloads or deny the reality of structural limitations. When companies appropriate the language of psychology to promote resilience without providing resources, they distort the concept beyond recognition. If the tech industry genuinely values growth, it must reclaim the term from its own misapplication. That means leaders acknowledging when conditions are unreasonable and realizing that sustainable progress requires more than just "leaning in." Real growth mindset looks like a manager admitting, "We didn't scope this project correctly," and providing the time to fix it, rather than demanding an exhausted team find more "passion" to bridge the gap.

🛠️ Is Your "Growth Mindset" Actually a Fixed Mindset in Disguise? I see more and more folks use "growth mindset" as an excuse to avoid accountability for current performance while promising future improvement that never comes. "I'm learning/growing." "I have a growth mindset about this." "This is part of my journey." Translation: "I'm performing poorly, but let's focus on my intentions instead of my results." 🔍 Growth Mindset Performance Gap: Dweck's research showed believing abilities can be developed and can lead to higher achievement. Somewhere between research and corporate America, growth mindset became a hall pass for mediocre performance. Meta-analysis by Sisk et al. (2018) examined 273 studies found growth mindset interventions had minimal impact - far smaller effects than claimed. Research by Yeager et al. (2019) show growth mindset only works when combined with systematic practice and clear performance standards. Case from my practice: A Series C Director kept missing quarterly targets but insisted on his "growth mindset" about performance gaps. 6mo of "learning and growing" while his team's metrics flatlined. ❌ Problem: Used 'growth mindset' as emotional comfort food instead of performance tool ✅ Solution: Apply the EXECUTE framework to bridge mindset+results ⚡EXECUTE Framework: Growth Mindset + Performance Discipline Evidence-based goals → Specific, measurable outcomes, not just "growth" Xecution tracking → Daily behaviors, not quarterly intentions Experiment rapidly → Test weekly, not "when ready" Correct course quickly → Adjust within 48hrs of getting data Upgrade systematically → Build capability through deliberate practice Track results → Measure outcomes, not just effort Eliminate excuses → Own performance gaps, don't romanticize them ⚙️The shift: Instead of "I'm growing in this area," ➡️ I'm hitting X metric by Friday or we pivot and ➡️ built systems to prevent predictable failures. Result: Hit next quarter's targets 3wks early, on track for H2. When Growth Mindset Becomes Fixed Mindset: 1. You're "learning" the same lessons repeatedly without changing behavior 2. You use growth language to avoid performance conversations 3. Your mindset is growing but your results aren't 4. “I'm working on it" is regular status, not temporary transition Bottom Line: 📈 Growth mindset without execution discipline is just expensive optimism. 📈 Real growth requires both the belief that you can improve AND systematic practice that proves you're doing it. Three questions to audit your growth mindset: 1. What specific skill have you measurably improved in the last 90 days? 2. Are you "growing" in the same areas you were "growing" in last year? 3 If someone looked only at your results, would they see evidence of growth? Rooting for you (and your measurable growth 🌲), SK Sources: Dweck, C. (2006); Sisk, V. et al. (2018). Psychological Science; Yeager, D. et al. (2019). Nature

𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 "𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐭𝐡 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭" 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐜𝐤. Most people use "learning from failure" as a convenient excuse for poor planning. The Trap of Eternal Learning The traditional advice says every setback is a lesson. It sounds noble. It feels productive. But for many, it’s just a comfort blanket for incompetence. If you're constantly asking "What is this teaching me?", you're likely ignoring the fact that you shouldn't have been in that burning building in the first place. Reflection without radical correction is just a slow-motion car crash. The Pivot: From Student to Architect The goal isn't to be the best "student" of your own disasters. The goal is to build systems where "lessons" aren't required every single week. The Golden Rules of High-Stakes Growth: Audit the Origin: If the same "lesson" appears twice, it’s not a growth opportunity; it’s a systemic flaw. Prioritise Avoidance: High-performers don't just learn from mistakes they obsess over avoiding the preventable ones. Shorten the Feedback Loop: Don't wait for a project to fail to start "learning." Critique the process while it’s still alive. Replace Empathy with Data: Stop being "gentle" with your failures. Be clinical. The Bottom Line A growth mindset is a tool for evolution, not a bypass for accountability. Stop romanticising the struggle and start optimizing the strategy. Growth shouldn't always have to hurt. Are we over-indexing on "learning moments" and under-indexing on actual execution?

We tend to focus on the numbers of a growth journey…Revenue growth. M&A count. CAGR. Rankings. I’m guilty of this, too. While numbers matter, what doesn’t get talked about enough is what enables those numbers to happen. Numbers are results—meaning they are the result of something that happens prior. What I don’t talk about enough—and what I’m actually most proud of as I reflect on the growth journeys I’ve participated in—is something else entirely. It’s the transformation of how the organization operated. How people thought. How decisions got made. How leaders showed up. What I’m most proud of—and equally fascinated by—is how we changed the way the organization worked. And then the numbers followed. The results resulted because we rallied a group of people around a similar mindset. That meant altering how people viewed things. Changing the language people used. Shifting their perception of us as an organization and their role in our success. That’s the real work—shifting mindsets. When people start using the same language. When they approach problems differently. When they stop defaulting to “how we’ve always done it.” That’s when you’ve really got something. Growth and the metrics associated with it shouldn’t be the goal. The goal is to shift mindsets. Do that, and the results will result.

One of the pivotal changes we introduced in the L&D function from 2016 was shifting the narrative from “learning delivery” to “business growth enablement.” These are phase wise development to build a learning organization. We moved beyond programs and completion metrics to embed learning into performance, internal mobility, and capability building aligned to strategic OKRs. This repositioned L&D from a support function to a growth partner—measured not by hours delivered, but by impact created. “Learning” to “Growth”: A Strategic Vocabulary Shift Corporate language is evolving. “Learning” once signified programs, courses, and skill acquisition. Today, “growth” dominates boardroom conversations because it signals something bigger — performance, mobility, innovation, and enterprise value. According to McKinsey & Company, organizations that integrate capability building directly into business strategy outperform those that treat learning as a standalone HR function. Growth reframes development as a strategic lever — not an activity, but an outcome linked to competitiveness, resilience, and revenue. Lets look at some of the Company Examples Driving the Shift… • Microsoft Under CEO Satya Nadella, the company embedded a “growth mindset” culture, tying curiosity and experimentation directly to innovation and cloud expansion. • Schneider Electric Its Open Talent Market platform connects employee skills to internal opportunities, shifting from training programs to career growth ecosystems. We had their HR leaders walk us through their best practice of Talent Market Place • AT&T Large-scale reskilling initiatives repositioned development as a strategic growth engine supporting digital transformation. • PepsiCo Career Growth Frameworks for frontline workers link learning directly to internal mobility and advancement. What are you Learning builds skills. Growth builds organizations. As corporates shift vocabulary from “learning” to “growth,” the real question isn’t semantic — it’s strategic. Are we still measuring courses completed, or are we measuring capability created, mobility enabled, and performance accelerated? Is your organization running learning programs — or building a true growth engine?