HR performance evaluations, "yes you are performing above average but yeahhhhhh not gonna cut it for a raise. In fact next year we'll lay you off for 'underperforming'. "

I recall reading an anecdote from a track and field coach who said his discus throwers got better performance when he asked them to throw about 70% as hard as they could on a full strength throw. I wonder how that would fit into this model, because rather than probability, it's more about not letting your brain get in it's own way when executing a technique.

If you are an actual top performer, they don't promote you because they don't want to lose your talent in your current role. It's why management is usually made up of half useless chodes.

Been my goal since I was like 14.

Above average is good, it keeps things on a positive upward trend while not wearing you out or blowing through all your time/energy/money.

I'm skeptical of just a mathematical model without tying it to real data, no matter how hard the researchers try to make it "realistic." You can make a mathematical model that says anything. That said, I did find this part interesting:

Burgess and his colleagues delved into the mechanics of ambition after earlier work found that fisheries performed best when boats stopped searching for more fish once they reached higher-than-average catches. They wanted to see if the mathematics supported the strategy in other realms of life, too.

I've been telling that for years and they call me insane or desperate or depressed or hopeless, etc.

There's no point to aim for the one off rare outcome, it's a statistical anomaly that it will happen. Aim for the average outcome, it's much more likely to happen.

Ps get degrees