A useful review separates a person’s results from the conditions they could not choose.

Outcomes are always a mixture of what someone did and what they were handed: the territory, the timing, the team they inherited, the year the market turned. Judging the mixture as if it were all effort is unfair in both directions, since it punishes good work in bad conditions and quietly rewards luck. What you actually want to know is how well the hand was played.

When you next assess anyone, including yourself, list the conditions first and the choices second. Ask what a capable person would have managed in the same circumstances, and measure against that.