There is an old idea that shows up across philosophy, science, and human experience, even if it’s rarely named directly in business or personal development conversations. It’s the idea that nothing meaningful comes without cost. That to gain something real, something else must be given.

One place this idea is made especially visible is in a Japanese manga and anime series called Fullmetal Alchemist. The story is set in a world where alchemy is practiced under a strict governing rule known as the law of equivalent exchange. The principle is straightforward and uncompromising:

…humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain something of equal value, something else must be lost.

Within the story, this law functions as both a physical constraint and a moral boundary. Nothing can be created from nothing. Every act of transformation carries a cost, and every attempt to avoid that cost only guarantees it will be paid later, often in far more damaging ways.

But the idea itself is much older than the show. It mirrors basic scientific laws. Matter doesn’t appear from nowhere. Energy isn’t created out of thin air. Action produces reaction. What Fullmetal Alchemist did wasn’t invent the law… it dramatized it. And in doing so, it revealed something most goal-setting conversations quietly avoid.

Goals don’t obey laws. People do.

Goals are inanimate. They don’t comply, resist, or negotiate. They don’t fail or succeed on their own. They simply exist as statements of intent. What determines whether a goal comes to life is whether the person pursuing it understands and works within the laws already governing change.

This is where many goal conversations begin to thin out. People are usually quite capable of articulating what they want. Vision is not the issue. Intention is not the issue. The friction begins when the conversation turns from wanting to paying… from aspiration to exchange.

Goal setting is not goal getting

Goal setting lives comfortably in the realm of thinking. It is strategic, conceptual, and often energizing. It involves defining objectives, imagining a future state, mapping possibilities. It feels productive because it asks very little of us in the moment.

Goal getting is different. Goal getting is where the law of equivalent exchange steps forward. It asks what must be given, consistently and structurally, for the outcome to materialize.

• Time.
• Focus.
• Discomfort.
• Identity.
• Certain habits.
• Certain protections.

This is where momentum either forms… or quietly collapses.

When the exchange is left unnamed, planning becomes ornamental. Effort is assumed but never designed for. Discipline is implied but never scheduled. Trade-offs exist, but remain unspoken. Activity increases, but traction doesn’t.

How the law shows up in business

In organizations, this law is operating constantly, whether leaders acknowledge it or not. Teams ask for growth while protecting misalignment. Leaders want scale without confronting clarity, role fit, or trust. Systems are expected to compensate for unresolved people dynamics and avoided decisions.

The exchange hasn’t necessarily been refused. It’s been deferred.

Deferred costs don’t disappear. They surface later as burnout, frustration, endless rework, and declining energy. The organization stays busy, but nothing fundamentally shifts, because the inputs required for transformation were never supplied. The law didn’t fail. It was ignored.

The personal cost of avoiding exchange

On a personal level, the pattern is just as precise. People want change without self-confrontation. Peace without boundaries. Freedom without responsibility. They underestimate what staying the same is already costing them, while exaggerating the price of change.

Identity plays a powerful role here. Many people are protecting versions of themselves that once kept them safe… competence, independence, agreeableness, strength. Letting go of those stories feels like loss, even when holding onto them is exactly what blocks the outcome they want.

The law does not punish this. It waits.

Alignment is honest accounting

The law of equivalent exchange isn’t moral. It doesn’t reward sincerity or punish hesitation. It operates more like accounting than judgment. If the inputs are there, results follow. If they aren’t, the system compensates elsewhere, usually at a higher long-term cost.

Alignment begins the moment this law is named. Because once the exchange is visible, choice returns. You can decide whether the goal is worth the cost, whether the timing is right, or whether the outcome itself needs to be revised. What stops working is pretending you can get a result you haven’t funded.

Goal setting gives direction. Goal getting demands exchange, and the space between the two is where most people quietly stall.

Strategic Reflection Prompt

What goal are you actively pursuing right now… and what exchange does it actually require that you haven’t fully named, accepted, or committed to yet?

About Giselle

I’m Giselle Hudson — writer, possibility thinker, musician, Organization & People Development Sensemaker™, and MCODE Legacy Coach. I help leaders and soul-driven professionals decode the deeper patterns shaping their business, work, identities, and results especially when it look like a performance issue but it’s really misalignment in disguise.

If something in your life or business feels off and you can’t quite name it, message me. Sometimes one conversation is all it takes to see what’s really going on.