Due to a confluence of different things that worked better in-person, I did 5 days in the office this week just like the olden times! It was a nice change of pace, even if it did mean that my focus work had to take a bit of a back seat.
People gently rib me about the ‘decompression’ time I (automatically) insert into my calendar after each meeting. “Are you a diver?”. But I do find it useful to have some time reserved to process thoughts or feelings before moving on to the next thing, particularly when it is incumbent on me to lead or facilitate conversations toward an outcome.
It’s easy to get overly attached to a solution or particular approach and therefore get dug in too early or too deep. I think this is proportionately true based on the amount of time, credibility or political capital someone has to invest to get something to happen. See the sunk cost fallacy. If you’re doing something complicated or complex, it’s sensible, vital even, to adapt as you learn. Perhaps one way to avoid getting dug in is to commit to outcomes. This gives everyone room to fumble their way toward success as understanding improves.
I suppose the flip side of the above is that you need some good descriptive constraints and success criteria to avoid working with very broad outcomes and getting lost in an endless sea of potential options.
Had another interesting chat about performance management. Past a certain point of basic competance, I think that the best outcomes are usually delivered by teams of people that work well together. So I’ve got mixed feelings about evaluating individuals, when as much thought should be given to team dynamics and how systemic drivers are helping or hindering.
I’ve disagreed with Jason Fried more often and more strongly in recent years. That might be set to continue, but this move away from SaaS for a new product is nothing if not interesting – https://once.com/
