I have seen too many people fighting battles, wasting resources and impoverishing the end results, just for the pleasure of winning. In other words, engaging in “lost” battles. And what are “lost” battles? You are asking. Well, lost battles are all of those situations that one cannot change and that are not critical to achieve the end goal. Imagine the following situation, you are implementing a project and suddenly something that puts the project at risk happens. How do you react? Would you prefer to fight to revert the situation although you have to spend more resources; or would you prefer to “lose” that battle by not engaging in reverse it but instead use your time and resources to find an alternative way so that you can be able to deliver alike results with no additional “pain” (higher costs, miss deadlines, etc) ? As a manager, I have seen too many situations where people fought just for the sake of winning, ending up with a missed Goal and higher costs. I also know that not engaging in a battle it is not as straightforward as we would like it to be. Securing the “war” it is much more important than winning a battle, unless that battle is critical to winning the “war”. Thinking in the long-term and focusing on the big pictur are, at least for me, “right” moves if you want to achieve goals, otherwise you may be wasting resources and increasing the likelihood of missing the goal.