Mediocre you: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
:''“If you aim at the moon, you may only ever hit the top of the tree
:''“If you aim at the moon, you may only ever hit the top of the tree
:''But if you aim at the top of the tree you may never get off the ground”’’
:''But if you aim at the top of the tree you may never get off the ground”’’
::It’s not so bad on the ground. And what good are you to anyone stuck in the top of a tree?
::It’s not so bad on the ground You have more options. And what good are you to anyone stuck in the top of a tree?


[[The Banker and the Fisherman]]
[[The Banker and the Fisherman]]
Line 7: Line 7:
===Organising principles===
===Organising principles===
*[[Mean reversion]]
*[[Mean reversion]]
*[[Never mistake luck for talent]]
*[[Mistaking luck for talent]]
**The investment manager who beat the Dow nineteen years in a row]]
**The investment manager who beat the Dow nineteen years in a row
**Promotion by random
**Promotion by random
*[[Ten thousand hours]] buys you a ticket to the raffle.  
*[[Ten thousand hours]] buys you a ticket to the raffle.  
Line 16: Line 16:
***To be in the right place in the first place.
***To be in the right place in the first place.


===Personality types and business===
'''The [[COO]] as an ISTJ''': Quiet, serious, earn success by thoroughness and dependability. Practical, matter-of-fact, realistic, and responsible. Decide logically what should be done and work toward it steadily, regardless of distractions. Take pleasure in making everything orderly and organized - their work, their home, their life. Value traditions and loyalty.
===[[Design of business]]===
Models of organising complex distributed systems:
*[[Evolution]]
*The [[invisible hand]]
*The [[end-to-end principle]]
Have a common design feature: They are not centrally planned.
Design of business - The will to bureaucracy - optimal size for an organisation? Central management as the antithesis of good system design.
===“No-one is well-rounded”===
Maybe — just maybe — that’s the problem?


=== ''Statistically'', it won’t be you. ===
=== ''Statistically'', it won’t be you. ===

Revision as of 13:36, 6 May 2017

“If you aim at the moon, you may only ever hit the top of the tree
But if you aim at the top of the tree you may never get off the ground”’’
It’s not so bad on the ground You have more options. And what good are you to anyone stuck in the top of a tree?

The Banker and the Fisherman

Organising principles

  • Mean reversion
  • Mistaking luck for talent
    • The investment manager who beat the Dow nineteen years in a row
    • Promotion by random
  • Ten thousand hours buys you a ticket to the raffle.
    • You need to have innate skill
    • You need to be lucky
      • To catch the light at all
      • To be in the right place in the first place.

Personality types and business

The COO as an ISTJ: Quiet, serious, earn success by thoroughness and dependability. Practical, matter-of-fact, realistic, and responsible. Decide logically what should be done and work toward it steadily, regardless of distractions. Take pleasure in making everything orderly and organized - their work, their home, their life. Value traditions and loyalty.

Design of business

Models of organising complex distributed systems:

Have a common design feature: They are not centrally planned. Design of business - The will to bureaucracy - optimal size for an organisation? Central management as the antithesis of good system design.

“No-one is well-rounded”

Maybe — just maybe — that’s the problem?

Statistically, it won’t be you.

The bigger the organisation, the less likely it is to be you. Your football team: one in 11 chance. Your work: one in 5,000. President of the USA: 9 in 300,000,000 [1] And that’s before you take any account of the practical realities of the specific situation.

  • The best man doesn’t always win.
  • Even if you are unusually talented, you’re
  • Seven Habits of Highly Effective People sold 25,000,000 copies. So even if it were true that these were the difference between success and failure, bad news: your competition just got a whole lot stiffer.
  • The world wide web made your competition a whole lot stiffer yet. You’re not just competing with the village any more. You’re competing with 7 billion.

Factually, it won’t be you

You’re reading self-help books looking for a summary; a short-cut; some anecdotes of famous men — and women — which, it is claimed, will distil the essence of that great person’s success. These people got their success without the benefit of such short-cuts.

  • If you stack all the

Ten thousand hours? It’s nonsense.

Looking at existing success stories is a waste of time.

  • We are brilliant at fitting known facts to our narratives - confirmation bias.
  • Curiously, our social sciences are brilliant at explaining how things happened, but utterly hopeless at predicting them in advance.

Any discipline worth getting to the top of has a rigid social hierarchy. Don’t underestimate it.

One of the main aims of any social hierarchy is making sure outsiders can only enter from the bottom. There are perfectly good reasons for this, but they have by products:

  1. working on the assumption there will be 9 presidents in your adult lifetime.