A Quote by James Mattis

When you're in operations, the best thing you can do at the top level is get the strategy right. You have to get the big ideas right, you have to determine what is the policy, what is the level of effort you're willing to commit to it? And then you delegate to those who have to execute that strategy to the appropriate level. What's the appropriate level? It's the level where people are trained and equipped to take decisions so we move swiftly against the enemy.
As the Eurozone takes steps towards closer fiscal and economic integration, and as the E.U. continues to develop, we need to be absolutely clear when it is most appropriate to take decisions at the national or local level, closer to the people affected, and in other cases when it is best to take action at the E.U. or global level.
Consistency is a huge thing at the top. It's hard to get to a good level, but once you get to a certain level, there's people who want your place.
We have also obtained a glimpse of another crucial idea about languages and program design. This is the approach of statified design, the notion that a complex system should be structured as a sequence of levels that are described using a sequence of languages. Each level is constructed by combining parts that are regarded as primitive at that level, and the parts constructed at each level are used as primitives at the next level. The language used at each level of a stratified design has primitives, means of combination, and means of abstraction appropriate to that level of detail.
We get to choose how we're going to live - what level of energy, what level of vibrancy, what level of excitement.
It's about the process. It's about getting better. 'Let's execute on this play, let's execute on this drive.' You do those things, and over the course of the season you'll get better as a team and you'll get to a point where hopefully you're playing at a high level to win the games that really become at another level.
We want experts, our finest people. We don't want people that are B level, C level, D level. We have to get our absolute best and the recommendations have to be a combination of defensive technologies tailored to specific agencies and every other discipline involved.
I think in some ways it would make more sense to have as a poverty level a relative concept and say, the level of poverty is that level of income or that level of consumption below which 10 percent of the people now are.
We have seen a lot more black and minority ethnic coaches at grass-roots level, academy level, development level, but of course at senior level there is a massive void. That is something that has to be addressed and there has to be a pathway for them.
I tend to stay quite level. I make better decisions when I am level and I also take in good information when I am level, so it's important for me to stay in that head space.
It takes sometimes years in the market to get the tuning to the right place where your game is as compelling at level 100 as it was at level 10.
In the third level you can have only one American on your team. In the second level you can have two, and in the first level you can have as many as you want. So I was 17 playing against men, some who were 30 or 35. It's a good way to develop, playing in Europe. You can get better faster.
what was the right level of prosperity, the level that banished dire need but did not satiate, the level that did not threaten the artist in the individual? And how did one stop when one arrived at it?
After formulating and communicating the right strategy and optimizing operations to execute that strategy, CEOs and other top leaders then must be able to build management teams that truly understand the big picture.
You only get so many opportunities to fight at the top level and stay at the top level.
I won at every level - all the way since I started playing the game of basketball at nine. I've won at every level, won championships at every level. And, you know, it won't be fulfilled until I win at the highest level.
Not ever having been an agent myself, my sense is that upper-level agents who have the most power, who can move people through the system more easily, are less willing to take on the volume of work to break somebody new. And then lower-level people, if they are willing to take on somebody new, they don't necessarily have as much sway, and it's harder for them to push somebody through.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!