Post hoc selection for lucky outcomes creates an illusion of causality.

"This person did these actions and it caused their massive success."

But we typically find most interesting stories that are already known to be surprising and interesting.

E.g. biographies of a rags-to-riches tale are most interesting.

The behaviors that are documented are correlated but not necessarily causal. It doesn't have predictive power.

We write biographies about people we already know are successful, but then we tell the narrative forward as though we don't know the outcome, and that creates the causal illusion.

Those behaviors allow that outcome, they do not necessarily cause it.

Most people who do those behaviors do not have massive success.