3 ms·

Picking on calories in/out is problematic if you think that is just two variables. Easily listed problematic parts, there are several ways to get "calories out

by taeric 4y ago

Picking on calories in/out is problematic if you think that is just two variables. Easily listed problematic parts, there are several ways to get "calories out," "calories in" have an impact on energy levels, and "hunger" and "satiation" are impacted by more than just "calories in or out." Though, as stated, the biggest gotcha is going to be that, unless you are doing extreme exercise, that will not be the dominate way that you are expending calories. Such that the criticism of the idea is flawed from the start. That is not what in/out means. For the rest? I don't buy it. For starters the WBR process can easily get downright toxic from my view. Too much time spent preparing the metrics without nearly enough time understanding. There are literally teams of people whose job is to present numbers up and feel like they are somehow masters of the system. Not at all healthy for the boots on the ground doing work. (Ironically, this is a manifestation of Goodhart's Law. When the metrics were being used by the boots on the ground, they were great. As soon as you get a middle layer...) Which, is the point of the "law." There are no evergreen policies or metrics that can lead to improvement. Sucks, as you can't even really take this in a meta direction. Constantly changing metrics and process is a bad idea when you are tracking how often you do that.

dasil003 4y ago
1000 times this. Any management system is only as good as its practitioners. The most talented managers and leaders tend to be good communicators, and so there are hundreds and thousands of great books on management philosophy, systems, tactics, etc. But all of it is subject to cargo culting by people who simply lack the experience or skillset to successfully follow the advice. At the end of the day, unless you have a quorum of leaders who viscerally understand what is meant by the old adage "the map is not the territory", then you are doomed. This is why leaders should be drawn from experienced practitioners, MBA programs should require 5+ years industry experience before admission, and Finance should not be let anywhere near product decisions (other than to set a budget).

by taeric 4y ago

dasil003 4y ago

1000 times this. Any management system is only as good as its practitioners. The most talented managers and leaders tend to be good communicators, and so there are hundreds and thousands of great books on management philosophy, systems, tactics, etc. But all of it is subject to cargo culting by people who simply lack the experience or skillset to successfully follow the advice. At the end of the day, unless you have a quorum of leaders who viscerally understand what is meant by the old adage "the map is not the territory", then you are doomed. This is why leaders should be drawn from experienced practitioners, MBA programs should require 5+ years industry experience before admission, and Finance should not be let anywhere near product decisions (other than to set a budget).