A colleague quit his job to launch a startup. A year later, he was back in employment — no money, no experience, no understanding of what went wrong. I want to try my own thing too. But I'll do it differently.
Not because I'm smarter. But because I read Taleb and understood, transitioning to entrepreneurship isn't a leap into the void. It's a barbell.
What Is the Barbell Strategy
Picture a barbell at the gym. Two heavy plates on the ends, nothing in the middle. That's exactly how Nassim Taleb describes optimal resource allocation in "Antifragile" — maximum protection on one side, maximum risk on the other.
No "golden mean." No "moderate risks." Only extremes.
Why does this work? Asymmetry.
On the safe side, you limit losses. Even if everything goes wrong, you stay on your feet. On the risky side, you open unlimited growth potential. Loss is fixed and small. Gain is theoretically unlimited.
Reading Taleb, I realized — I was already doing this intuitively. I just didn't understand the mechanics. Now I do.
Why the "Balanced Approach" Is Dangerous
Most people try to find the "golden mean." Seems logical — a bit of risk, a bit of stability. A balanced approach.
The problem is that balance only works where outcomes are predictable and linear. But careers, business, investments — these are nonlinear systems. Here, "a bit of risk" means enough to lose if you're unlucky. But not enough to gain big if you're lucky.
You end up in the worst place: exposed to losses, closed to gains. That's why I chose a different approach.
Barbell in Career — Dynamic Version
My situation now: I want to transition into entrepreneurship. Not tomorrow, not next month — it's a process. First freelancing, then my own product. But jumping into the unknown without protection — that's not my option.
My current split: 95% stable job / 5% experiments.
What are these 5%? Small projects. Hypothesis testing. Learning what I don't know. They're so small in scope that they don't affect my main work. I'm not torn between two worlds. I simply allocate a bit of time to understand if it even works.
Key point: these experiments can't break me. If they don't work out — I lose nothing. Job, money, stability remain. But if something works — I gain data, experience, market understanding.
This isn't the final destination — it's a transition stage. Right now the ratio is 95/5, but it can change: become 80/20 in a year, then 50/50, or maybe switch completely. This is planned evolution. I'm not jumping into the unknown — I'm gradually shifting the barbell's weight as I gather enough data and experience. Losses remain limited at each step.
Barbell in Investments — Static Version
Second example — investments. Here the barbell works differently — statically.
My allocation: 90% stocks (indices, stable) / 10% crypto (volatile).
Why exactly 10%? Because that's the amount I can lose without any consequences for my life. Crypto drops to zero — I won't even notice financially. Emotionally might sting a bit, but nothing more.
Now let's look at real dynamics. Crypto drops 40% — my portfolio is down 4%. That's nothing. But when crypto grows 200% — that's +20% to the entire portfolio. Noticeable.
Asymmetry in its purest form. Loss is limited, gain is unlimited.
Unlike career, here I don't plan to change proportions. 90/10 is a fixed rule. No need to constantly make decisions, no need to think "maybe add a bit more." The proportion is set and that's it.
This is a static barbell — protection on one side, potential on the other, and no movement in the middle.
How to Apply the Barbell
If you want to try this approach, here's where to start.
First: identify your "catastrophe" — and protect against it. This could be loss of income, loss of all savings, loss of reputation. Anything that would break your life. This side of the barbell must be maximally safe.
Second: find where asymmetry exists — where you can risk small bets with potential for big wins. This could be investments, side projects, new skills, experiments. The key — loss must be fixed and small.
Third: remove the "middle" — everything that creates the illusion of safety but actually just disperses resources. "A bit of this, a bit of that" doesn't work.
The final step — determine which type of barbell you need:
Static barbell — when you fix proportions and stop thinking about them. Investments, time allocation, budget. Set the rule — and it works on its own.
Dynamic barbell — when you plan to change proportions as you learn. Career transitions, new projects, exploring new fields. Start with 95/5, gradually move toward a different balance.
The key distinction: a dynamic barbell isn't chaotic proportion changes. It's planned evolution with clear transition criteria.
Conclusion
The "golden mean" isn't safety. It's vulnerability pretending to be stability.
The barbell offers something else — the ability to both protect from catastrophe and benefit from uncertainty. You don't need to choose between safety and risk. You can have both if you separate them correctly.
I apply this in two areas. In career — dynamically, gradually increasing the share of experiments. In investments — statically, with fixed proportions. Both approaches work because they're based on one principle: limited losses below, unlimited potential above.
The key is in the asymmetry of losses and gains. That's what makes the barbell antifragile.
True stability isn't avoiding risk. It's creating conditions where risk can't destroy you, but can make you stronger.
