> Preparing to do the thing isn't doing the thing.

For some types of work, the work we call prep work is 90% of the work and most of what determines how well the finished product turns out.

Painting is a good example. You can grab a bucket of paint and paint brush and start “doing the thing” by slapping paint on the surface. Your paint job is going to be very poor and fail early relative to a professional who properly sands, cleans the surface, preps the work area, and does it right. You might save some time now by skipping straight to doing the thing, but you might also lose more time later when you have to repeat the job because the paint is peeling or you’re cleaning up a paint mess that spilled on to another surface because you didn’t prepare.

▲

markburns 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think in this example those prep work items _are_ doing the thing.

But then telling people about a new product could also be doing the thing.

There’s definitely something to be said for defining what the thing really is being an important part of doing it, but that can also spiral out of control into not doing the thing.

I think thingness is more of a variable property of the current thing you are doing. Than a binary is or isn’t the thing.

All we can really do is regularly check how much the thingness of the current thing is aligned with the main thing’s thingness.

▲

code_biologist 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Prep work sucks. In whatever field, I always love hearing from the greats how they make the hard work a little less sucky. Good tools, better workflows, figuring out what they can let slide, accepting the struggle and getting zen. The people who do it 80% right and manage to make peace with that always seem the most productive.

▲

Jaxan 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I don’t think prep work sucks. Cleaning up after, though… Although maybe that’s just prep work for the next time ;-).

▲

atoav an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can do a good job if you want to. But that usually required taking a step back and thinking about these 20% you didn't manage last time. Maybe you use the wrong approach, the wrong tool, maybe your tool is no longer sharp because you told yourself prep sucks. 80/20 is a good philosophy if you just want to earn a living, but a bad philosophy if you want to reach mastery (which coincidentally can translate into making a relatively good living).

The important part is, that the greats never were okay with just 80%. Their goal is usually to make the best work they can and that means improving on things they have previously done. That doesn't mean the project needs more work or resources. It means it makes best use of the work and resources available while delivering something that satisfies the masters quality standards.

Also: In some cases 80/20 mediocrity does in fact not cut it and it is just an excuse to do less work and not to think hard about things.

	▲	code_biologist 44 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for the thoughtful comment. It's complicated. I'm a perfectionist miniature painter by hobby. I love the stories floating around about how quantity can lead to quality (photography, pottery): https://austinkleon.com/2020/12/10/quantity-leads-to-quality... In most of my hobbies I feel like my growth and talent is limited by lack of volume, not my care or attention to detail. It's hard to let go and use one color instead of three, or not fix a flaw in model part nobody will ever see. I'm sure other people have the opposite challenge.

▲

satisfice 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Unless doing the thing well matters to you.

How do you like those 80% Boeing aircraft with optional parts that may or may not come away in flight?