Feed Login

Does 80/20 make sense? 2021-01-02 05:07:12

I remember the first time I heard of the pareto principle of 80-20. It sounded fascinating to me. I wanted to use it to drastically improve my time management skills. 

I find that I gravitate towards such mind hacks to get more out of my routine. it is only 2020 that made me realize that the most effective way for time management is not to over commit to begin with. Regardless, I always like to discover things like the 80-20 rule so I can improve. 

Recently, I started to wonder if 80-20 is really a good idea. Why is it that we only dedicate 20% of our time for the most productive outcome? Why does only 20% of our input result in 80% of output? Is it really efficient to have 20% lead to the other 80%? 

Maybe this 20% is limiting us to think that only 2/10 things we do are what matter. Maybe we have been conditioned to believe in 20% of whatever we do as productive?

How about I create a 40-60 rule? What if it is more balanced and our inputs equal outputs?
Even better - according to the ONE thing - how about we just focus on the 20% only and totally ignore the rest so we essentially have 1 bucket for 100% of things that matter and everything is completely off our minds and offers no distraction?

Maybe it's time to patent my 40-60 rule.  

More from Keni

I only have a surface-level understanding of the Pareto principle, but I believe it is derived mathematically from nature. If that's the case, I wonder if we have the choice of modifying 80/20 to 40/60 or if 80/20 is just the natural order of things. I thought productivity was on your list for this year, but I see that it's not. That may be one of the topics I do a deep dive on this year.
2021-01-02 15:18:10
I caveat same level of understanding as Brandon.

My interpretation of this is that you can't always do the Thing. Usually doing a thing is assemblaged to a network of responsibilities. 

Like let's say I want to write for example. I can't just write. I have to go live life and have experiences that inspire me to write.

Let's say I want to code software for writers. I can't just code. I need to write to know what writers want. I need to also setup a dev environment. I need to setup the server or go serverless. I need to do all these other things that aren't the thing.

How I interpret Pareto Principle is not as a sign that I need to shift 80-20. But rather making damn careful that I align my energies and times with the 80-20. I kind of see the 80-20 as an inevitable fact of nature -- similar to what Brandon noted at -- where I will never be able to escape 80-20 but I can however know clearly what my 20 is and what my 80 is. This allows me to use my best energy time on the 20 to really have most impact while at the same time modulating myself for the 80 to not burn out.

I see it similar to sleep. If someone were to come to me and say the optimal sleep/wake cycle is 8/16 to 10/14 I wouldn't try shifting that. I wouldn't try seeing how I can maybe get by on 4/20 sleep/wake cause then i have all these hours! I'd rather try to maximize the 14 through iterative reflection. 
2021-01-02 17:28:21
lmao whenever you need brandon to agree with you, see how your argument fits in with the laws of sleep. and then make that argument. NATURE!! but yeah. I used to try to go against nature so much -- even in sleep -- and i never had anything to show for it except for getting my ass whooped. nature is strong.
2021-01-02 17:32:27
Or declare your unconditional love of  products. 😎 
2021-01-02 18:00:44
Only way to optimize your time and effort according to Pareto principle is identifying that 20% of the time, what you can achieve with that and completely skip the other 80%. This of course is not always possible when you have certain requirements to meet. 
2021-01-02 20:37:28
Hmm - I want to go against nature. I want there to be 40% of things that influence 60% of my outcome. I want to ignore/remove the other useless % that dont compound. In a way, COVID helped towards that end. Eliminating commute has added a lot back to my useful %. 
2021-01-03 00:10:26
Keni my theory right now is that the best way to beat the pareto principle is not to try figuring out a way to game nature yourself... but through collaboration.

I think that in great founder relationships 1+1 != 2 but rather a much higher value.

In great founder matches, you have a complimentary fit between Founder A and Founder B's 20%s and 80%s.
2021-01-03 18:51:50
Yeah the quote - "If you want to go fast, go alone, if you want to go further, go with others."
2021-01-03 19:17:08
My gut response is -- I wonder if zen buddhists can get 100% results from 0% input? It's like a smart person heard of 80/20 -- and thought, "nah, I can do better than that? -- then they called him Buddha.
2021-01-09 18:16:00