Welcome to Week 68 of the High Performance Playbook.

You’re now reading with over 35k other high performers! As our community grows, we want to extend our gratitude for reading and for continuing to share The High Performance Playbook with friends, family, and co-workers. Your support means the world.

If you’re new and just tuning in to the HPP, we cover the strategies and frameworks that separate the top 1% from the top .01%. We dive deep into health & fitness, longevity, personal finance & investing, business growth hacks, and how to optimize every area of your life.

If any of those topics sound interesting, the High Performance Playbook is for you.

If you enjoy the content and get some value from it, please share this link with a few friends and help me spread the word! There’s no better compliment than a referral.

Ready? Start your engines… Let’s GO:

Hundreds of readers have already discovered Kora MD® - the most trusted source for high-quality peptides and GLP-1s, and the only brand that offers a personal care clinician included with every plan at no extra cost.

Use Code HPP50 for $75 off your first order.

👉 Get Your Free Consultation Today

Mindset & Psychology

What You Tolerate, You Teach

Every leader has a stated standard. And every team can tell you what the real one is.

The gap between the two is a tolerance problem. The actual standard in any environment is what gets consistently allowed, not what gets said. What you walk past without addressing. What you accept as close enough. What you let slide once, then twice, then indefinitely.

That's the standard you've set, regardless of what's written in any document or said in any meeting.

This applies to how you lead others. It applies equally to how you lead yourself.

High performers enforce standards behaviorally.

The tolerance pattern works like this. Something happens that falls short of your stated expectation. You notice it. You decide, consciously or not, whether to address it.

If you don't, you've sent a signal. The person on the other end of that signal, whether it's a team member or your own inner voice, receives it clearly: this is acceptable. The line has moved. And the next time something similar happens, the threshold for what gets addressed has shifted slightly lower.

Over time, the accumulated tolerance becomes the culture. Or in the context of self-leadership, the accumulated tolerance becomes the baseline. And baselines are remarkably hard to raise once they've settled.

The high performers I know who run tight operations are not the loudest about their standards. They're the most consistent about addressing deviations quickly, directly, and without drama.

A brief conversation. A clear correction. A pattern interrupted before it becomes a norm. The consistency is what creates the culture, not the speeches.

On the personal side, the same mechanism runs.

The workout you skip without acknowledgment.

The boundary you say you have but don't enforce.

The habit you restart every Monday.

Each of these is a tolerance signal you're sending to yourself. Each one teaches you something about what you actually believe your standards are.

The question worth sitting with is specific. Pick one area of your business or your life where you've felt frustrated by a recurring pattern. Now ask: when did I first tolerate this? What did I allow that established this as acceptable? The answer is almost always traceable to a moment where addressing it felt harder than absorbing it. And the cost of that moment has been compounding ever since.

Raising a standard that's been eroded requires more than restating it. It requires a visible correction that signals the line has moved back. One clear, consistent response that shows the tolerance window has closed. People, including yourself, adjust quickly when the signal is unambiguous.

What you tolerate, you teach. The standard you enforce is the only standard that exists.

Decide what yours actually are. Then hold them.

Biggest Story of the Week (Mindset & Psychology)

Before we continue, a quick question we’re polling our readers about (your answer and information will never be shared), as more and more high performers are experimenting with peptides:

Health & Fitness + Longevity

The Nutrient Most People Are Short On

If you had to guess the most common nutritional deficiency in otherwise healthy, performance-focused adults, most people wouldn't land on magnesium.

They'd guess vitamin D. Maybe iron. Maybe B12.

But magnesium is the right answer, and the gap matters more than most people realize.

Estimates vary by population, but research consistently finds that a significant portion of adults in developed countries don't meet recommended magnesium intake through diet alone. The reasons are structural: modern agricultural soil is depleted relative to historical levels, highly processed food contains very little, and several factors that are common in the lives of high performers (chronic stress, heavy training, high caffeine intake, alcohol consumption) accelerate magnesium depletion. The more output you're demanding from your body, the higher your magnesium requirement and the more likely you are to be running short.

Amateurs track calories and protein. Professionals track the inputs that run the system underneath.

Here's why the gap matters. Magnesium is involved in several hundred enzymatic reactions in the body. It plays a direct role in muscle contraction and recovery, sleep regulation and melatonin production, stress response and cortisol modulation, cardiovascular function, blood sugar metabolism, and neurological performance.

When magnesium is low, the effects don't announce themselves clearly. They show up as disrupted sleep, elevated baseline anxiety, muscle cramps or tightness that doesn't resolve the way it should, heightened stress reactivity, and a general flatness in energy and mood that's easy to attribute to other causes.

The deficiency is rarely severe enough to produce obvious clinical symptoms. It's typically sub-optimal in a way that quietly degrades performance across multiple dimensions.

The dietary sources worth knowing: leafy greens (spinach, Swiss chard), pumpkin seeds, almonds, dark chocolate, legumes, and whole grains are among the highest in magnesium. If you're eating these regularly and in volume, your dietary intake is probably reasonable. If your diet is heavily processed or low in vegetables, the gap is likely real.

Supplementation is one of the more evidence-supported options in the broader supplements landscape. Magnesium glycinate and magnesium threonate are the forms with the best absorption and the least digestive disruption. Glycinate is the more accessible and affordable option and works well for sleep and recovery support. Threonate has stronger preliminary evidence for cognitive and neurological benefits. Both are worth discussing with your physician before adding, particularly if you're managing any cardiovascular or kidney conditions.

Timing matters: taking it in the evening, 30 to 60 minutes before sleep, is when most people report the clearest benefit on sleep quality and overnight recovery.

The intervention is quiet, not dramatic. But for a nutrient this foundational, running short on it consistently is a slow leak in a high-performance system.

Patch the leak.

Biggest Story of The Week (Health & Fitness)

Personal Finance Tip of the Week

The Full Cost of a Bad Hire

Most founders calculate the cost of a bad hire in salary.

They shouldn't.

Salary is the visible line. The real cost is buried in several places at once, and when you add them up, a single hiring mistake at almost any level of an organization is one of the most expensive decisions a founder can make.

Start with the direct costs: the time spent recruiting, interviewing, and onboarding the person who didn't work out. The salary, benefits, and any equipment or tooling costs during the period of employment. The cost of recruiting again, whether that's agency fees, job board spend, or internal time. The onboarding investment in the replacement. These alone typically represent months of that role's fully-loaded compensation, sometimes significantly more.

Then the indirect costs. A misaligned team member doesn't just fail to contribute. They drag.

They consume management attention at a higher rate than a good hire would, create friction in team dynamics that affects people around them, and slow decisions because their work product can't be relied on. They sometimes damage client relationships or internal culture in ways that take longer to repair than the person was ever employed.

Calculate the cost of a bad hire before you hire them.

The opportunity cost layer is the one most founders never quantify but feel most acutely.

The projects that didn't happen while management bandwidth was absorbed by the problem hire.

The good candidates who were passed over because the role was already filled. The revenue that wasn’t generated because a key function was operating below capacity for months or longer.

There's also a compounding morale effect. High performers notice when a bad hire stays too long. It signals something about standards and decisiveness that gets noticed by the people you most want to keep. The people most capable of leaving are usually the ones paying the closest attention to how leadership handles underperformance.

The practical implication runs in both directions. Slow down at the front end: better process, more reference checks, a clearer definition of what the role actually requires before interviewing starts. And speed up at the back end: when it's clear a hire isn't working, move faster than feels comfortable. The cost of staying in the ambiguity compounds every week.

The calculus on hiring slowly is well understood. The calculus on exiting quickly when it doesn't work is less practiced but equally important.

A bad hire is expensive. Keeping one too long is more expensive still.

Biggest Story of The Week (Personal Finance)

Business Playbook

Your Network Is a Compounding Asset

Most people's networking strategy produces a list of contacts.

A list of contacts is not leverage.

Leverage is what happens when the right relationship, at the right moment, produces an outcome that would have taken you years to reach on your own, or wouldn't have been reachable at all. Things like a warm introduction to a client who becomes your biggest account, a conversation that redirects a major decision before you've committed to the wrong path, or a partnership that unlocks a distribution channel you couldn't have built from scratch.

That kind of return comes from a small number of deeply invested relationships built over time.

The distinction in practice comes down to how the relationship was built and what it's based on. Transactional networking is built around the exchange: what can I get from this person, and what can I give them in return. It's efficient, and it's mostly useless, because the relationships it produces are shallow and symmetrical. Neither party goes out of their way for the other when the transaction isn't immediately apparent.

Compounding relationships are built differently. They start with genuine interest in the other person's work, challenges, and goals. They're maintained over time through consistent low-effort contact: a relevant article, a referral, a check-in after something significant happened in their business. They generate asymmetric returns because people go out of their way for people they genuinely like and trust, and the moments when that matters are unpredictable in timing and enormous in value.

The high performers I know who are best networked don't describe themselves as good at networking. They describe themselves as genuinely curious about the people they've met and deliberate about staying in touch with the ones who matter. That's the whole system.

What makes a relationship compound comes down to four things.

Consistency over intensity: a brief check-in every quarter beats a long dinner once a decade.

Generosity without scorekeeping: give referrals, make introductions, share information without waiting for reciprocity.

Memory: remembering what someone is building and following up on it later signals genuine interest in a way almost nothing else does.

And selectivity: investing deeply in a small number of relationships beats spreading effort across hundreds.

The compounding dynamic works because trust accumulates. Every interaction that demonstrates genuine interest, reliability, or generosity adds to a balance the other person isn't consciously tracking but absolutely feels. When the moment arrives where a relationship matters, the ones with a high balance deliver. The ones built on transactions deliver when the transaction is obvious and nowhere else.

Map the 20 relationships in your life right now that have the most potential to compound. Ask honestly: are you investing in them consistently? If not, start this week. Small, consistent, and genuine contact.

Your network is either compounding or decaying. It's rarely standing still.

Biggest Story of the Week (Business)

DOPAMINE HIT

Thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed this week’s newsletter, please share it with some friends! And thank you for reading!

🗓️ STAY TUNED:

Next week we're getting into the attention economy. We’ll look at what it's actually costing you, who profits from your distraction, and how to build a relationship with your own focus that holds up against the systems designed to fragment it.

Here’s to your success,

Austin L. Wright

Join my inner circle - Follow me on X for daily business breakdowns, lifestyle hacks, and a behind-the-scenes look at what my team and I are building.

Follow me on IG to see how I’m living the blueprint. I practice what I preach.

P.S.

• We’re always looking to improve and create better newsletters for you in the future. If you have any feedback or suggestions for future editions, I’d love to hear from you! Just reply directly to this email and give me some ideas for how you think we could make it better!
  

• If you’re reading this online, make sure you subscribe using the button below:

_{Disclaimer: The ideas shared in this newsletter are those of the author, and this is in no way intended to be medical, legal, or financial advice. Always do your own research and consult with licensed professionals.}