2 ms·
One thing people seem to forget regarding tradeoffs is that it's possible to do objectively bad ones: It's possible to have neither a bias for action nor curios
by im3w1l 5y ago
One thing people seem to forget regarding tradeoffs is that it's possible to do objectively bad ones: It's possible to have neither a bias for action nor curiosity. Mentioning both values is a reminder to be on the efficient frontier.
Further, you probably dont want to pick an extreme tradeoff. Getting a drop more action at the cost of huge learnings is a mistake as is getting very irrelevant knowledge at a huge cost of action.
- marcosdumay 5y agoYes, it's possible to have suboptimal situations. But no, communicating feel-good meaningless statements (like asking for people to both act fast without waiting for the details and to know the details about the consequence of their actions) is an infallible way to create apathy and move away from the Pareto frontier, not towards it.
- im3w1l 5y agoI think you are slightly distorting both statements when you are constructing that contradiction. If you drill down into Amazons "bias for action", what they really want is that if an issue is urgent and blocking then people should feel empowered to deal with it without having a full knowledge. They should take that risk. That doesnt mean always acting fast without knowing details. Meanwhile staying curious isn't necessarily about researching decisions in particular. It involves for instance ongoing tech education. So if you think about it ongoing education is totally compatible with making occasional snap decisions.