The Share-Everything Two-Outcome Test
Share your playbook and turn either outcome into an advantage.
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 4
- Confidence
- 99%
Jonathan Hadad learned this decision rule when a new leader was about to inherit a division supported by years of his scripts and training work. His mentor reduced the choice to two productive outcomes. If Hadad shared everything and the recipient could not perform it as well, the result would demonstrate Hadad's unusual value. If the recipient improved the work, Hadad would gain a stronger benchmark and have to develop further. The test converts knowledge sharing from a perceived zero-sum loss into a learning experiment: transfer the complete playbook, observe the recipient's performance, and treat either result as useful evidence. In Hadad's case, sharing also transformed the incoming leader into a mentor who helped him advance.
Origin
Hadad's mentor, Stephen Luigi Piza, gave him the rule when Hadad resisted handing years of sales scripts and training material to an incoming division leader. Hadad shared everything, and the new leader became an important mentor.
Core principles
- 01Hoarding knowledge protects pride rather than progress.
- 02If another person cannot reproduce your result, your distinct value becomes clearer.
- 03If another person improves your method, their result gives you a higher standard.
- 04Sharing can create mentors and collaborators where defensiveness creates rivals.
How to run it
- 1
Locate the guarded playbook
Name the process, scripts, training, or expertise you are withholding and the fear behind that choice.
Pro tip Separate legitimate confidentiality from fear that another person may outperform you.
Watch out Do not share information you lack permission to disclose.
- 2
Share the complete method
Give the authorized recipient enough detail to reproduce the work rather than protecting yourself with strategic omissions.
Pro tip Include the practical details that took you the longest to learn.
- 3
Observe the outcome
Compare the recipient's execution with the original result after they have had a fair opportunity to apply the method.
Watch out A rushed or unsupported attempt does not fairly test the method or the person.
- 4
Use the result
If they cannot match the work, recognize the evidence of your distinct value. If they improve it, study the difference and raise your standard.
Pro tip Invite the recipient to explain any adaptation that produced a better result.
In the wild
Hadad had spent years building sales scripts, training, and operating material for a retail division. When a new leader arrived, he initially planned to withhold it. After his mentor challenged him, Hadad handed over everything; the incoming leader later helped him reach another level professionally.
→ The feared transfer produced a valuable mentoring relationship rather than making Hadad irrelevant.
Common mistakes
Sharing a weakened version
Strategic omissions prevent either outcome from giving clean evidence about value or improvement.
Treating improvement as defeat
A better result is useful because it reveals a standard and method from which the original expert can learn.
Ignoring confidentiality
The abundance rule does not override legal, regulatory, contractual, or personal boundaries.
Is it for you?
Best for
Leaders and specialists deciding whether to share a hard-won process with a colleague, successor, or peer.
Not ideal for
Confidential, regulated, proprietary, or personally sensitive information that the recipient is not authorized to receive.
From the transcript
“when you share everything you have he goes one of two things happens”
“either a you give them everything and they can't do it as good as you which means you're the outlier which makes you more valuable”
“or B they're better than you and they do it better than you which means you have to work harder to be better than what…”
From the episode
Breaking the Mortgage Mold: Jonathon Haddad's Journey