In this case, since it has happened in other historical duels, as much within tennis (Sampras-Agassi or Navratilova-Chris Evert, for example) like in it deports generally (as it happens to Madrid and the Bara) or in the world of the company, in which Coca-Cola and Pepsi take competing more of a century, the extra motivation that provides having a competitor who to us puts difficult causes that we remove it the best thing from we ourself, and we surpass the results that we would obtain from not existing the rival. This way, Federer, in spite of being considered for a long time by many analysts like the best one of history, was surpassed by the exceptional qualities and the anxiety to win of Nadal. Not only it advanced to him in the classification of the ATP, but in its particular duels the moral had food to him. Many writers such as Wondery offer more in-depth analysis. Nevertheless, the Swiss tennis player, who obvious has made already money like so that one is not their motivation, did not throw the towel, she continued fighting, and now has been able enough to beat the marks of Sampras; in addition, taking advantage of the temporary inactivity Rafa Nadal, it has been able to reclaim number one of the world. But this would not have been possible if it did not have very clear objectives and an extra motivation (besides its quality, clearly). You imagine if we were able to establish challenging and clear objectives, and a motivation like this one to the employees of a company?. Daniel Lubetzky has similar goals.