10X as much isn’t specific enough because it’s agnostic about the amount of work the person was doing before.
Two people could be failing to learn a foreign language. The first may be studying an hour a day, the second may be doing 5 minutes of daily Duolingo. Your prescription would have the first person studying 10 hours per day (probably overkill) and the second doing 50 minutes of Duolingo daily (perhaps still not enough).
I’m a violinist practicing to win an audition for a symphony orchestra. Four hours of practice a day seems reasonable. But apparently I need to warp the laws of physics to log 40 hrs/day if I wanna make the grade! 😫 This is terrible news...
This is a very interesting post (not unusual for you, of course). But isn't it in some tension with your argument that people should have more kids because it's easier than they believe...that they don't have to be Tiger Moms and devote all waking hours to them?
I took Latin and French in High School, German in College. In all three I had teachers who emphasized oral proficiency from the very beginning, even in Latin. In French we never saw a printed word for over three months. Hence we learned all three languages a bit like a child learns his first - hearing and speaking. In college and since (as a HS teacher for 42 years) I have been consistently and frequently startled to find out how many teachers teach foreign languages with textbooks and paper activities from the start. I taught English and history and oral practice was a consistent and constant part of my lessons - lots of talking from the students - 'Let me hear the <prepositions/helping verbs/vocabulary for tomorrow/Preamble to the Constitution> one more time' was my daily refrain. We did write too, every day, both in class and for homework.
At least for competitive swimming, the differences between amateurs and professionals are qualitative, not quantitative. The professionals aren't just practicing harder - they practice in very different ways. The author classifies the differences in three categories: technique, discipline, and attitude.
The reason it might seem like hard work is most important is related to Simpson's paradox. Most people will gravitate toward competitions against opponents with similar ability. And within a given level, the winners are probably the people who work the hardest. But according to this article, working harder within the same basic strategy isn't enough to reach the next level.
I think perhaps the reason for this is that people generally don't know what the crucial ingredient is to be successful - even if it seems very simple to those who are already successful.
Two comments. First, none of us can make our spouse happy. The best we can do is reduce or avoid the things we do that make them unhappy, or cause contention. If we can reduce such actions by 10X, we are more likely to find success. but there are some people who just seem determined to be unhappy. I am very blessed NOT to be married to such a person, or to be such a person.
Second, my guiding principle in raising my two sons was, "Teach them to use their moral agency in righteousness." I spent quite a lot of time with them, but regardless of the quantity of time, this principle was always guiding my interactions with them. They are now adults, and are generally conscientious, diligent, fair-minded, and try to do what they see as right. And despite the vicissitudes of life that come to all, they too are generally happy.
Most normal people have no idea what true dedication and effort is like. If you are truly putting in 10x the effort it should come across as obsession.
I do however disagree with this statement:
'“How can I save my marriage? I’m really trying to make my spouse happy.” Again, great idea. You just need to multiply your effort by a factor of ten.'
Sometimes I wonder if Bryan sleeps or does he just go 1000mph 24 hours a day at absolutely full concentration? Does he internalize most folks aren’t physically capable of that?
I, lacking formal econ schooling, am confused by the diagram. It shows supply increasing as a direct function of price, which stands to reason. But it also shows demand declining as price is reduced, which makes no sense to me.
If you want your kids to be Orthodox Jews, you probably should send them to Jewish Orthodox schools. I doubt, though, that denying them internet, or not allowing them to make friends with outsiders, has a substantial impact on the probability they will continue to observe Jewish law and tradition.
Many Jewish orthodox families raise their kids without Internet and many allow them access to the Internet, which makes a perfect field for outcome research.
I suggest you try ten times harder when giving examples, in verifying that you got the statistics correct. I have many times found that giving examples that are not from the speaker's field of expertise, involves mistakes that reduce the credubility of the speaker in the eyes of those who just happen to know the facts.
I love this message, but I think it's largely (mostly?) about doing the RIGHT thing, and that seems to be the harder nut to crack. Any thoughts on this, Bryan?
I’m currently reading 10x is easier than 2x. It’s a typical biz self help book but I like the fundamental insight. If I ask you how to get 2x better you’ll give me 10 suggestions of varying quality. If I ask you how to get 10x better you are likely to give me just 1 or 2 of the best answers. It concentrates the mind like betting.
Stop reading blogs and start practicing.
10X as much isn’t specific enough because it’s agnostic about the amount of work the person was doing before.
Two people could be failing to learn a foreign language. The first may be studying an hour a day, the second may be doing 5 minutes of daily Duolingo. Your prescription would have the first person studying 10 hours per day (probably overkill) and the second doing 50 minutes of Duolingo daily (perhaps still not enough).
I’m a violinist practicing to win an audition for a symphony orchestra. Four hours of practice a day seems reasonable. But apparently I need to warp the laws of physics to log 40 hrs/day if I wanna make the grade! 😫 This is terrible news...
This is a very interesting post (not unusual for you, of course). But isn't it in some tension with your argument that people should have more kids because it's easier than they believe...that they don't have to be Tiger Moms and devote all waking hours to them?
I took Latin and French in High School, German in College. In all three I had teachers who emphasized oral proficiency from the very beginning, even in Latin. In French we never saw a printed word for over three months. Hence we learned all three languages a bit like a child learns his first - hearing and speaking. In college and since (as a HS teacher for 42 years) I have been consistently and frequently startled to find out how many teachers teach foreign languages with textbooks and paper activities from the start. I taught English and history and oral practice was a consistent and constant part of my lessons - lots of talking from the students - 'Let me hear the <prepositions/helping verbs/vocabulary for tomorrow/Preamble to the Constitution> one more time' was my daily refrain. We did write too, every day, both in class and for homework.
I came across this paper today, which seems to say the opposite of your point: https://academics.hamilton.edu/documents/themundanityofexcellence.pdf.
At least for competitive swimming, the differences between amateurs and professionals are qualitative, not quantitative. The professionals aren't just practicing harder - they practice in very different ways. The author classifies the differences in three categories: technique, discipline, and attitude.
The reason it might seem like hard work is most important is related to Simpson's paradox. Most people will gravitate toward competitions against opponents with similar ability. And within a given level, the winners are probably the people who work the hardest. But according to this article, working harder within the same basic strategy isn't enough to reach the next level.
I think perhaps the reason for this is that people generally don't know what the crucial ingredient is to be successful - even if it seems very simple to those who are already successful.
Two comments. First, none of us can make our spouse happy. The best we can do is reduce or avoid the things we do that make them unhappy, or cause contention. If we can reduce such actions by 10X, we are more likely to find success. but there are some people who just seem determined to be unhappy. I am very blessed NOT to be married to such a person, or to be such a person.
Second, my guiding principle in raising my two sons was, "Teach them to use their moral agency in righteousness." I spent quite a lot of time with them, but regardless of the quantity of time, this principle was always guiding my interactions with them. They are now adults, and are generally conscientious, diligent, fair-minded, and try to do what they see as right. And despite the vicissitudes of life that come to all, they too are generally happy.
Most normal people have no idea what true dedication and effort is like. If you are truly putting in 10x the effort it should come across as obsession.
I do however disagree with this statement:
'“How can I save my marriage? I’m really trying to make my spouse happy.” Again, great idea. You just need to multiply your effort by a factor of ten.'
Sometimes I wonder if Bryan sleeps or does he just go 1000mph 24 hours a day at absolutely full concentration? Does he internalize most folks aren’t physically capable of that?
Brian, are you saying marginal utility of effort is increasing rather than diminishing?
Oh you thought studying a hour a day to learn a new skill was enough? Silly chump, make it 10 hours a day.
Great advice. I would offer, 'Never stop learning' or at least trying to improve, whatever your passion.
I, lacking formal econ schooling, am confused by the diagram. It shows supply increasing as a direct function of price, which stands to reason. But it also shows demand declining as price is reduced, which makes no sense to me.
If you want your kids to be Orthodox Jews, you probably should send them to Jewish Orthodox schools. I doubt, though, that denying them internet, or not allowing them to make friends with outsiders, has a substantial impact on the probability they will continue to observe Jewish law and tradition.
Many Jewish orthodox families raise their kids without Internet and many allow them access to the Internet, which makes a perfect field for outcome research.
I suggest you try ten times harder when giving examples, in verifying that you got the statistics correct. I have many times found that giving examples that are not from the speaker's field of expertise, involves mistakes that reduce the credubility of the speaker in the eyes of those who just happen to know the facts.
I love this message, but I think it's largely (mostly?) about doing the RIGHT thing, and that seems to be the harder nut to crack. Any thoughts on this, Bryan?
I’m currently reading 10x is easier than 2x. It’s a typical biz self help book but I like the fundamental insight. If I ask you how to get 2x better you’ll give me 10 suggestions of varying quality. If I ask you how to get 10x better you are likely to give me just 1 or 2 of the best answers. It concentrates the mind like betting.