The Uneven Math of Investing in People
You give more than most — to clients, to people just starting out, to relationships. The returns do not always match the investment. That is not a reason to stop. It is just the actual math of operating that way.
I spent part of today helping someone who never asked for it.
Someone I know is working on a new project and needed some guidance on Google Ads. I have been doing this long enough that the basics feel obvious to me. But they were not obvious to them, and watching things click was genuinely enjoyable. I did not charge for it. I did not track the hours. I just tried to be useful and encouraging.
I think about mentorship a lot, partly because I did not have much of it coming up. I figured most things out by doing them wrong first, then slowly less wrong. I am not complaining — that process taught me things. But I also know it did not have to be that hard. A few people who knew more than me, willing to share an hour, could have shortened a few painful years.
So when I get the chance to be that person, I try to take it. Without being asked. Without keeping score.
The same week, a client I have gone out of my way to be accessible to — phone calls, quick responses, extra attention — started sending me AI-generated audit reports questioning our work. A relationship that felt like more than a business transaction turned back into one, fast.
That is the uneven math of investing in people. Some of it compounds quietly over years. Some of it evaporates the moment expectations are not met. You rarely know in advance which is which.
I do not think the answer is to give less. I think the answer is to be clear-eyed about it — to know that the returns are real but they are not always proportional, and definitely not always immediate.
The people who give without keeping score usually end up ahead. Just not on the timeline they expected.
