2 ms·

As a counter point, I've also seen plenty people too focused on doing every little step up to some imagined standards that they never get to complete anything —

As a counter point, I've also seen plenty people too focused on doing every little step up to some imagined standards that they never get to complete anything — basically, life intervenes and they got to leave with nothing really done at all. I am personally goal motivated: I like achieving and building things (I enjoy the process in as much as I got the better of it :)). When things are complex, I come up with smaller goals that are on the path to getting the big thing done, all the while thinking how these things fit together. This has made me great at coming up with iterative steps where each step brings value: even if I stop at any one point, I have done something useful. In your example, I would probably dismantle the car enough to get the engine out and rebuilt and back in, and then go back to it sometime in the future to work on other stuff, all the while keeping a functioning car as I am rebuilding it.

h0l0cube 2y ago
> This has made me great at coming up with iterative steps where each step brings value: even if I stop at any one point, I have done something useful. This is really just getting caught up on semantics, and what you've described is essentially the same as a 'quest mindset'. The goal vs quest mindsets are basically waterfall vs (lowercase a) agile mindsets. In the former you risk building something you don't want or under-allocate resources to achieving it, in the latter, you've realized that you've misestimated what the final outcome will be or should be, and know that there will be a discovery process alongside development. > basically, life intervenes and they got to leave with nothing really done at all. And perhaps there is no sense in that journey being 'complete' as there's always some way to improve things. But I think the caution here on the 'quest' mindset, is to still have something functional early on – "Release early, and release often" as it were. But this caution also holds for the 'goal' mindset, perhaps moreso, as there's a higher risk of misunderstanding what 'complete' looks like, or all the side-'goals' you never anticipated, and becoming dismayed when you've found yourself settling in on a loong quest anyway.
- necovek 2y ago
  > This is really just getting caught up on semantics, and what you've described is essentially the same as a 'quest mindset'. The goal vs quest mindsets are basically waterfall vs (lowercase a) agile mindsets. But most people describe the difference as "enjoying the process" vs "enjoying the result". I enjoy the result, I only come up with multiple "results" along the way to an "end goal". Instead of seeing it as a difference in semantics, this is probably how "goal-oriented" people can learn to achieve big things. As in, everybody can get there, and really, this means to me that you can be agile whether you are goal oriented or process/quest oriented.
  - h0l0cube 2y ago
    There's a lot to unpack here. But firstly, "enjoying the process" and "enjoying the result" aren't really in binary opposition. If one weren't to 'enjoy the process' but only 'enjoy the result' they would be working in desperation to reach the end. If one only 'enjoyed the process' they would never finish anything, because completing would be the end of the joy. Porque no los dos? I'm certain that most people that 'enjoy the process' also enjoy completing things, and are dismayed when there's a trail of half-finished works cluttering their mental (and physical) space. Similarly, I couldn't imagine someone who doesn't 'enjoy the process' ever embarking on anything that has no external motivation (e.g., a paycheck, prestige, etc.). But if we imagine them to actually be in binary opposition, and I had to pick between a life of 'quiet desperation' and eternal enjoyment, I'd probably opt for the latter. And this is as someone who's spent much of my professional career in anguish at the process and desperate to reach the goal to feel that sweet dopamine hit (and a lot of unfinished personal projects in my wake). > this is probably how "goal-oriented" people can learn to achieve big things The implication here – again – is that "process enjoyers" don't achieve big things/don't complete things, and perhaps also that "goal enjoyers" fail to achieve less often, and I'm not sure what that assertion is based on. Perhaps an alleged 'goal-focused' mind is more willing to indulge in a lot of unpleasant work to reach a goal, but then a 'process enjoyer' can enjoy the work instead and also reach the goal. I would say the latter – 'the pig in shit' – is more likely to reach their goals. But perhaps you are under the belief that the 'process enjoyer' is less likely to do things that most people find unpleasant. Once again, I'm not sure what that belief would be based on, but it could be true.
ocodo 2y ago
> I've also seen plenty people too focused on doing every little step up to some imagined standards that they never get to complete anything This is the true definition of the Yak Shave.
- mklepaczewski 2y ago
  It's not yak shaving. Yak shaving is (possibly) recursive explosion of seemingly unrelated tasks which are required to complete the original task. The comment fits description of a maladaptive perfectionism.
- Ma8ee 2y ago
  Not at all. Yak shaving is getting caught up in all the surrounding, sometimes supporting tasks, so you never get to the main task. Yak shaving is spending time finding the ultimate editor, choosing between syntax highlighters and schemes, configuring git, et c., so you never actually get around to write any code. That is different from wrenching the last nanosecond of optimisation from some not particularly central part of the code.

h0l0cube 2y ago

> This has made me great at coming up with iterative steps where each step brings value: even if I stop at any one point, I have done something useful. This is really just getting caught up on semantics, and what you've described is essentially the same as a 'quest mindset'. The goal vs quest mindsets are basically waterfall vs (lowercase a) agile mindsets. In the former you risk building something you don't want or under-allocate resources to achieving it, in the latter, you've realized that you've misestimated what the final outcome will be or should be, and know that there will be a discovery process alongside development. > basically, life intervenes and they got to leave with nothing really done at all. And perhaps there is no sense in that journey being 'complete' as there's always some way to improve things. But I think the caution here on the 'quest' mindset, is to still have something functional early on – "Release early, and release often" as it were. But this caution also holds for the 'goal' mindset, perhaps moreso, as there's a higher risk of misunderstanding what 'complete' looks like, or all the side-'goals' you never anticipated, and becoming dismayed when you've found yourself settling in on a loong quest anyway.

necovek 2y ago
> This is really just getting caught up on semantics, and what you've described is essentially the same as a 'quest mindset'. The goal vs quest mindsets are basically waterfall vs (lowercase a) agile mindsets. But most people describe the difference as "enjoying the process" vs "enjoying the result". I enjoy the result, I only come up with multiple "results" along the way to an "end goal". Instead of seeing it as a difference in semantics, this is probably how "goal-oriented" people can learn to achieve big things. As in, everybody can get there, and really, this means to me that you can be agile whether you are goal oriented or process/quest oriented.
- h0l0cube 2y ago
  There's a lot to unpack here. But firstly, "enjoying the process" and "enjoying the result" aren't really in binary opposition. If one weren't to 'enjoy the process' but only 'enjoy the result' they would be working in desperation to reach the end. If one only 'enjoyed the process' they would never finish anything, because completing would be the end of the joy. Porque no los dos? I'm certain that most people that 'enjoy the process' also enjoy completing things, and are dismayed when there's a trail of half-finished works cluttering their mental (and physical) space. Similarly, I couldn't imagine someone who doesn't 'enjoy the process' ever embarking on anything that has no external motivation (e.g., a paycheck, prestige, etc.). But if we imagine them to actually be in binary opposition, and I had to pick between a life of 'quiet desperation' and eternal enjoyment, I'd probably opt for the latter. And this is as someone who's spent much of my professional career in anguish at the process and desperate to reach the goal to feel that sweet dopamine hit (and a lot of unfinished personal projects in my wake). > this is probably how "goal-oriented" people can learn to achieve big things The implication here – again – is that "process enjoyers" don't achieve big things/don't complete things, and perhaps also that "goal enjoyers" fail to achieve less often, and I'm not sure what that assertion is based on. Perhaps an alleged 'goal-focused' mind is more willing to indulge in a lot of unpleasant work to reach a goal, but then a 'process enjoyer' can enjoy the work instead and also reach the goal. I would say the latter – 'the pig in shit' – is more likely to reach their goals. But perhaps you are under the belief that the 'process enjoyer' is less likely to do things that most people find unpleasant. Once again, I'm not sure what that belief would be based on, but it could be true.

ocodo 2y ago

> I've also seen plenty people too focused on doing every little step up to some imagined standards that they never get to complete anything This is the true definition of the Yak Shave.

mklepaczewski 2y ago
It's not yak shaving. Yak shaving is (possibly) recursive explosion of seemingly unrelated tasks which are required to complete the original task. The comment fits description of a maladaptive perfectionism.
Ma8ee 2y ago
Not at all. Yak shaving is getting caught up in all the surrounding, sometimes supporting tasks, so you never get to the main task. Yak shaving is spending time finding the ultimate editor, choosing between syntax highlighters and schemes, configuring git, et c., so you never actually get around to write any code. That is different from wrenching the last nanosecond of optimisation from some not particularly central part of the code.