Why You’re Successful But Still in Survival Mode (and how to fix it)
- May 7
- 11 min read
You already know that more money does not resolve the underlying feeling of scarcity and survival, but you probably don’t really know why or how to fix it. The financial thresholds may have moved, (first it was a particular monthly revenue, then an annual figure, then a headcount, then a reserve), and yet the felt sense of precarity has followed you across each of them. The realm of survival has merely expanded to accommodate your growth, and grown more complex in the process.
The anxiety used to be personal, your own income, or your own household, but now it encompasses your team, their families, and all the obligations that flow from having built something that others depend upon. Survival, at this stage, is a higher-stakes enterprise and no less exhausting for being better resourced.
This is one of the topics I find myself dealing with in the sessions I have with my clients, because they deeply desire to enjoy their success, spend less time working and allow even greater success to come to them more easily than they have experienced until now. But being in survival mode gets in the way of all of that, and is something that absolutely must be addressed.
The purpose of this essay is to explain why this is happening and share some of the tools I use with my clients to fix it.
In this essay:
PART I
The Problem: Why Survival Mode Persists Despite Success
The structural causes of survival mode, why the anxiety persists independently of material conditions, and what psychological and philosophical mechanisms sustain it.
I. The Myth of Self-Responsibility
One of the primary assumptions underpinning survival mode is that you are responsible for your own survival. That assumption keeps you contending for your survival with every action. But this could not be further from the truth. The idea that you are responsible for your survival is a myth. It is an idea constructed in the mind. The truth is that you did not author your own arrival in the world (notwithstanding any pre-incarnation plans you made on a spiritual level). You found yourself already in existence, in a particular body, with a particular mind, in a particular historical moment, inside a set of formative circumstances you neither chose nor designed. Not just the difficult parts but the capacities, capabilities and overall potential for greatness too. These were given, not self-created — just like the sun was already here and the climate attuned for human flourishing.
Most of what has made you successful, (I’d wager 99% of it), are things you do not acknowledge in your survival equation. When I share this fact with clients, I see the cogs turning behind their eyes because they rarely stop to consider it. This condition has a philosophical name, Geworfenheit, or ‘thrownness’, coined by Heidegger, and what it describes is not merely that we inherit some conditions while creating others, but that the very faculties by which we act are themselves prior to us.1
This is not a diminishment of what you have built but rather a more honest accounting of what you contributed to it. You showed up. You made decisions. You worked. And something bigger was also at work and has always been at work behind the scenes.
Your contribution to the machinery of your own existence is considerably smaller than survival mode assumes. This is not cause for alarm. It is cause for relief.
II. The Myth of Control and Agency
Even if we accept that we are not wholly responsible for our survival, we still can cling firmly to survival mode because it paradoxically gives us a feeling of control. Feeling in control is worth a great deal to an entrepreneur, particularly the belief in one’s own control or agency (which is the flip side of responsibility). It is associated with higher motivation and persistence, what psychologists call an internal locus of control. All successful entrepreneurs and executives have it, and it works well most of the time. It activates the 1% that you are responsible for and makes it effective. However, at a certain level, the same belief that drives you forward begins to produce not greater agency, but greater anxiety. Julian Rotter’s foundational research on this dynamic established it clearly, internal locus of control becomes a source of chronic stress when applied to outcomes that are genuinely outside one’s control.3
The practical consequence is the one you already know — that the anxiety does not resolve when circumstances improve, because the circumstances were never the real cause. It is structural, built into the psychology of someone who has learned to equate control with safety, and safety with survival.
III. The Myth of Responsibility Toward Others
As a business grows, so does the cast of people whose lives are touched by its decisions, team members, their families, clients who have come to rely on it. The weight of that is significant, and taking it seriously is not something to argue against. But there is a distinction between honouring your obligations, which is a genuine practice of responsibility, and believing that other people’s lives depend on your survival in some fundamental sense. There is a human tendency to overestimate one’s own centrality in the lives of others. Adam Smith called it self-deceit, an inflation that feels like care but is also, in part, a way of making oneself necessary.5 If so many others depend on your survival, then it must mean that you are significant. And we all desire to be significant in some way.
To believe that all of these things depend on your vigilance, your decisions, your survival is a defence against meaninglessness. If I am responsible, I am significant. If I am significant, I matter. And if I matter, I am in some way protected against the terror of randomness or the anxiety of being a finite, contingent person in an unpredictable world.
There is a more truthful way to hold the people in your orbit which is to recognise each of them as a full and sovereign subject with their own capacities, their own relationship to provision, their own inner life that does not begin or end with you. To believe you are the source of what they receive is to make them smaller than they are, however generously that belief is held. This is the distinction the philosopher Martin Buber drew between two fundamentally different ways of encountering another person, meeting them as a whole subject in their own right, or as an object within your own system.6 When we carry others’ survival as a personal weight, we are doing the latter. Every person in your orbit has their own relationship with the Divine. You are not their source. You are, at most, one vessel through which something good has flowed to them.
The people in your orbit have a source of provision that is not you. You are, at most, one vessel through which their good has moved. You are not the reservoir.
The distinction matters practically because the business owner who carries their team’s survival as a personal weight makes decisions from a different position than one who takes their obligations seriously while holding that their team are sovereign people whose lives extend well beyond the business.
PART II
The Solution: Three Practices That Chip Away at Survival Mode
IV. Gratitude: Healing the Myth of Self-Responsibility
The myth of self-responsibility holds that you are the primary architect of your own outcomes, that what you have built is a product of your effort and your decisions. And it is, in part, but only in part because the rest was given to you. The practice that dissolves this myth is gratitude, because gratitude is, at its root, the acknowledgement that you have received something you did not create.
Gratitude is often treated as a feeling but it functions more like a practice of attention — a deliberate redirection of what the mind focuses on. Consciousness is inherently selective as we do not take in reality whole, but attend to the aspects of it that our habits and expectations have trained us to prioritise. Survival mode forces you to focus on what you do not have, while gratitude makes you focus on what is already here.
Starting Small: Practising Gratitude
This practice will feel uncomfortable at first, particularly for people who have built success through rigorous self-reliance. Acknowledging what was given can feel dangerously close to undermining the credit you have legitimately earned. Notice that resistance as it is just the myth defending itself.
Begin with something almost too small. At the end of each day, identify one outcome from the day that you cannot fully explain by your own effort. Not necessarily a miracle, just something that went well in a way you didn’t entirely engineer. Perhaps it’s a conversation that landed better than you expected, an introduction that arrived at the right moment, or an idea that surfaced in the shower. Write it down. One sentence is enough. The point is not to produce a list but to train the eye to see what is already there.
After a week of this, add a second layer that focuses on your own capacity whether that’s your intelligence, your energy, your particular way of thinking — something that you are grateful for but did not create. This is the more uncomfortable step. Sit with it rather than rushing past it. The discomfort is part of the work.
V. Surrender: Healing the Myth of Control
The myth of control tells us that we are safer when we feel that we are in control and have agency over our outcomes. But the truth is, pretending that we are in control over uncertainty only makes us more anxious. Surrender is the practice that dissolves this myth. Not the surrender of ambition or high standards, but releasing of the portion of the outcome that lies beyond your control. The active embrace of what currently is and what cannot be changed, is the practice of directing effort precisely where it is effective, and releasing the grip on everything else. Nietzsche called this amor fati, love of fate and it helps us to trust that an outcome does not require your anxiety in order to resolve itself.7
You cannot be creative if you insist on being in control all of the time. As I am consistently teaching, true creativity comes from intuition, from letting spirit flow through you, what I call clairsalence™. Your best decisions are on the other side of surrender.
Starting Small: Practising Surrender
Surrender will feel like negligence for someone whose business exists partly because of their extraordinary capacity to hold things together, releasing the grip, even slightly, will trigger the fear that things will fall apart. That fear is not evidence that surrender is wrong but is evidence that the myth of control is deep in your psyche. Expect it, and proceed anyway.
Its hard to do this with small stakes because you already know how to lead, you aren’t a micro manager. You need to pick a big decision and make a list of the things you contribute to that decision vs what is genuinely outside of your control. Write down everything even if it seems silly. Write down that the sun rising tomorrow is genuinely outside of your control. You will start to see that most of what makes something happen has nothing to do with you.
The next step is to build this into your working practice deliberately. After completing any significant piece of work, a proposal, a session, a launch, take sixty seconds to consciously release it. Some people find a physical gesture useful — a breath, an open hand. The ritual is less important than the intention. You are practising the cognitive habit of distinguishing between what was yours to do and what is now in the hands of the universe.
VI. Humility: Healing the Myth of Responsibility Toward Others
The myth of responsibility toward others holds that the people in your orbit, your team, your clients, the families touched by your business, are dependent on you in some fundamental way. This myth is difficult to examine because it presents as care but beneath it is the same belief that you are more central, more necessary than you actually are. Humility is the antidote to this belief. By humility, I do not mean the self-deprecating kind or the performance of smallness, but the accurate reckoning with the scope of your role.
Starting Small: Practising Humility
Begin with a thought experiment rather than an action. Choose one person in your team or close orbit and spend five minutes genuinely considering their life outside your business — their history before they met you, their skills that have nothing to do with their role, the relationships and resources they would draw on if your business disappeared tomorrow. Do this slowly and without rushing toward a conclusion. The goal is simply to let them become larger in your imagination, more whole, more capable, more provisioned than the version of them that lives inside your survival equation.
The action that follows from this, when you are ready for it, is to catch yourself in moments of centering yourself. Your team needs you to honour your commitments, lead well, and pay them fairly. They do not need you to believe that their futures rest on your survival.
VII. Concluding Thoughts
What this essay has tried to show is that survival mode rests on three beliefs, each of which feels true, each of which is understandable, and none of which holds up under honest examination. You are not the sole author of your own outcomes. Your vigilance is not what keeps things from collapsing. And the people in your orbit are not as dependent on your survival as you have been assuming. These are not comfortable realisations but they are, however, freeing ones.
You did not get here by yourself. You will not get to the next place by yourself either. The sooner survival mode releases its grip on that truth, the sooner you can stop contending and start receiving.
P.S. If this essay has been useful, and you are ready to undertake this work in the context of your business, the inner work that materially shifts outcomes, Manifest Results™ is the appropriate next step. It is a 100-day 1:1 programme designed specifically for business owners and business leaders. To find out more and apply, click here.
Lola Seshat is a Spiritual Teacher and Spiritual Business Strategist (a former management consultant) who helps CEOs and Business Leaders scale their businesses through business metaphysics and spiritual practices. Read more about her here.
References
1. Being and Time (1927), Martin Heidegger, trans. Macquarrie & Robinson (Oxford: Blackwell, 1962). Heidegger introduces Geworfenheit (thrownness) to describe the condition of finding oneself already in existence, in a particular body, culture, and historical moment, without having chosen any of it.
2. Enchiridion (c. 125 CE), Epictetus, trans. George Long. The opening passage establishes the foundational Stoic distinction between what is in our power (judgement, intention, response) and what is not (the body, reputation, external outcomes).
3. Rotter, Julian B. ‘Generalised Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement.’ Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 80, no. 1 (1966): 1–28.
4. The Denial of Death (1973), Ernest Becker (New York: Free Press). Becker argues that the human drive to feel indispensable is an existential defence mechanism against the terror of mortality and contingency.
5. The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), Adam Smith, Part III. Smith’s ‘impartial spectator’ functions as a corrective to self-deceit: the tendency to overestimate one’s own centrality in the lives and fortunes of others.
6. I and Thou (1923), Martin Buber, trans. Ronald Gregor Smith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1937). Buber distinguishes between I-It relations, in which others are encountered as objects within one’s own system, and I-Thou relations, in which the other is met as a full and irreducible subject.
7. The Gay Science (1882), Friedrich Nietzsche, §276, trans. Walter Kaufmann. The Stoic cognate is Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book IV: ‘Accept the things to which fate binds you.’
8. Simon, Herbert A. ‘A Behavioural Model of Rational Choice.’ The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69, no. 1 (1955): 99–118. Simon coined satisficing to describe decision-making under bounded rationality, demonstrating that optimising for certainty is itself irrational when the required information is unavailable.
9. Emmons, Robert A. and Michael E. McCullough. ‘Counting Blessings versus Burdens: An Experimental Investigation of Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being in Daily Life.’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, no. 2 (2003): 377–389.
10. The Principles of Psychology (1890), William James, Vol. 1, Chapter XI: ‘The Stream of Thought.’ James argues that consciousness is selective by nature and that attentional habits shape what feels real and possible.
11. Maslow, Abraham. ‘A Theory of Human Motivation.’ Psychological Review 50, no. 4 (1943): 370–396. Maslow cautioned against reading the hierarchy as a simple ladder, noting that needs can be simultaneously active and that the subjective sense of safety is not automatically produced by its material conditions.
Comments