When two (or more) thoughtful people offer advice that badly conflicts, or when your [by which I mean: my!] own instinct conflicts with advice, it's tempting to average the advice.
Show this thread
This point about the damage done by "averaging advice" is striking: https://dalton.substack.com/p/letter-to-myself-in-late-2008 …pic.twitter.com/cyIwEQpWjX
-
-
-
This often works really badly. It seems to be better to (1) identify the conflict; (2) work pretty hard to resolve it; and (3) then bear down hard on whatever you decide.
Show this thread -
I think the reason it's tempting not to do this is because it means acting against the advice of someone who may be very thoughtful and insightful. But the benefit is in part in (2) (you think pretty hard); and when you bear down hard (3),...
Show this thread -
you learn faster, because any error becomes apparent more quickly. So you can course correct, if needed, and in the meantime you've learned much more than you would have from averaged advice.
Show this thread -
I've written this as "you", but of course it's all reflection upon making this mistake myself in the past. Sometimes it doesn't matter, sometimes it does, but I've never thought "gosh, I'm glad I averaged that advice!" Decide, commit, learn, and change direction seems better...
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The binary form is unhelpful here. Yes, if you ask a Boolean question, but not for "advice". Your friends don't give advice in the form of procedures derived from a systematic ruleset. Why? Can't compare advice without a ruleset. If you had the rules, you wouldn't need advice.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I like this a lot! Reminds me of the quote: "No committee ever built anything great"
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.