First, I would acknowledge that in complex systems we often sit with the discomfort of holding two opposing truths at the same time. There can be a systems problem AND a people problem simultaneously. But I always advocate for looking at the system first, because what appears to be a bad apple often is not once in a better system.
I would also say never try to change people, it's a fool's errand. What we can do is communicate in a way that is compassionate and about trying to understand.
In the post, I wrote: "Good/bad news: everything is a people problem (and every people problem is a communication problem)."
Everything is a people problem because companies, teams, etc, are nothing more than groups of people working together. The key part is "communication problem". The issues arise mostly from our inability to communicate and collaborate effectively with each other. Which, again, brings us to the system: the interactions between the parts are more relevant than the parts in isolation. :)
> Think using first principles. For any non-trivial topic X, Google will give you evidence for X and not(X). What’s true? First principles are the basic assumptions that cannot be deduced from any other assumptions—the core. For whatever you’re trying to do, find those, and build up from there.
Did you expand on this someplace else? Or is it analogous with existing principles we could read somehwere else? Thanks!
Thanks for calling me out on this, Adi! In hindsight, it's definitely not super clear.
Thinking using first principles is often seen in opposition to thinking by analogy. It's simply boiling down whatever you're doing to its essence, what in math would be called axioms. This way you can better see for yourself what's true or not. When reasoning by analogy, you're seeing the result of someone else's thinking, which may or may not be correct or right for you.
This website is a great resource about first-principles thinking: https://fpt.guide
Thanks for the Insights :)
One small clarification
In point 14:
> attempt to change not people but the system in which they exist.
In point 15:
> everything is a people problem
For me, this felt slightly conflicting. So how we address people problem?
Try to change ppl? or Try to create systems around them ?
Great question!
First, I would acknowledge that in complex systems we often sit with the discomfort of holding two opposing truths at the same time. There can be a systems problem AND a people problem simultaneously. But I always advocate for looking at the system first, because what appears to be a bad apple often is not once in a better system.
I would also say never try to change people, it's a fool's errand. What we can do is communicate in a way that is compassionate and about trying to understand.
In the post, I wrote: "Good/bad news: everything is a people problem (and every people problem is a communication problem)."
Everything is a people problem because companies, teams, etc, are nothing more than groups of people working together. The key part is "communication problem". The issues arise mostly from our inability to communicate and collaborate effectively with each other. Which, again, brings us to the system: the interactions between the parts are more relevant than the parts in isolation. :)
Thank you for the detailed explanation :)
Cool post!
It's not clear to me what you mean by this one:
> Think using first principles. For any non-trivial topic X, Google will give you evidence for X and not(X). What’s true? First principles are the basic assumptions that cannot be deduced from any other assumptions—the core. For whatever you’re trying to do, find those, and build up from there.
Did you expand on this someplace else? Or is it analogous with existing principles we could read somehwere else? Thanks!
Thanks for calling me out on this, Adi! In hindsight, it's definitely not super clear.
Thinking using first principles is often seen in opposition to thinking by analogy. It's simply boiling down whatever you're doing to its essence, what in math would be called axioms. This way you can better see for yourself what's true or not. When reasoning by analogy, you're seeing the result of someone else's thinking, which may or may not be correct or right for you.
This website is a great resource about first-principles thinking: https://fpt.guide
I hope this clarifies it a bit. :-)
This does help, thanks for the additional insights + link, appreciate it!