Get my 5-day email funnel that generated $400,000 from a single launch

Want an email sales funnel that's already proven to work? Get the entire word-for-word email funnel that generated $400,000 from a single launch and apply it to your own business.

Yes! Send me the funnel now
Start Here: “The Ultimate Guide to Habits”

“You just need to get started” is bad advice

118 Comments- Get free updates of new posts here

0

I’m fascinated by people at the top levels of every field. Whether it’s CEOs, best-selling authors, presidents, or even Jason Bourne in The Bourne Identity, I love learning the techniques and mindsets that pros use to become the best.

At these rarefied levels, top performers use different techniques than average people.

Today, a guest post that will challenge your notions of success and of finding an idea to pursue.

How do the world’s most successful academics get published into toughest academic journals…multiple times each year?

How does a PhD student at MIT get a book published while studying an insanely challenging area, including…

“…distributed algorithms and lower bounds for wireless networks, with a particular focus on the intersection between theory and practice. A major direction in my theory work is the introduction of an abstract interference adversary that incarnates the diversity of unpredictable interference encountered in real wireless networks; e.g., as caused by unrelated devices on the same band, multipath effects, or electromagnetic inteference…”

Here’s one piece of the puzzle: They don’t “just get started” like so many of us have been taught to do.

The fallacy of “just get started”
How many times have you heard someone say, “You just need to get started”?

I’ve even said it myself — that the hardest part of nearly anything meaningful (health & fitness, managing your money, etc) is getting started.

But Cal Newport, a published author and PhD in computer science at MIT, disagrees.

Getting a chance to hear someone disagree with you and back it up beautifully with logic and examples is a rare thing. So today, I’ve invited Cal to write a detailed guest post about the importance of ideas — and the fallacies of thinking “just getting started” is the right answer.

He’ll show you why it’s important to look beyond quick tactical wins and instead focus on the strength of your idea, which takes painstaking practice and ongoing iteration.

In my Earn1k course — where I help people focus on earning money on the side — we blend quick-win tactics with ongoing attitudinal and behavioral change. For example, you can quickly learn which of your ideas will never make you any money. But to find an idea that will be highly profitable, and to construct a referral and lead-generation strategy that will have you drowning in new business…and to price your services so you’re making rich profits…that is not a 1-page worksheet. It takes work. And yet, it’s important to blend the two to capitalize on getting started and dominating over the long term.

Honestly, this is not the kind of stuff most blog readers want to hear. They want “tactics” and “tips” about how to “hack” their lives. But it’s important to blend quick wins with deep theory and rigor. The most successful people know this — and maintain a balance of quick wins and long-term strategy.

Take it away, Cal…

* * *

The Idea Virtuosos: Why the common advice of “You just need to get started” is bad advice”

By Cal Newport

Imagine that you’re a computer scientist submitting a paper to SIGCOMM, an elite academic conference focused on computer networks. Your task is daunting: Of the nearly 300 research papers submitted to this year’s conference, only 30 were accepted. Each of these accepted papers survived detailed reviews from at least five different experts and were then subject to an intense debate of their merits at the conference’s 2-day program committee meeting.

Not surprisingly, the papers that make it through this gauntlet are spectacular: they each present an original idea which is then examined, evaluated, justified, and discussed in painstaking detail.

Here’s a typical table; it’s taken from the winner of the best paper award at this year’s conference:

Multiply this level of detail to fill ten double-columned, small-fonted pages, and you’ve got yourself a reasonable submission.

At SIGCOMM there’s no wiggle room: to get a paper accepted your idea must be a blockbuster, otherwise it will crumble under the intense scrutiny it faces both from your own analysis and the many experts who will tear down your claims of importance, piece by piece.

What fascinates me about this feat is that the world’s top computer science professors replicate it many times each year. The professor I work with at MIT, for example, last year published two papers at SIGCOMM, not to mention two papers at equivalently elite networking conferences, and two more at a pair of elite conferences in related fields.

It follows: if you’re interested in the process of finding standout ideas — be it for a start-up, work project, blog topic, or book proposal — there’s perhaps no better experts to learn from than the idea virtuosos running top academic research labs. These professors face an impossibly high quality threshold for their work, and yet manage to match it with a half-dozen or more brilliant ideas each year. Once you dive inside their world, however, an unsettling reality becomes clear: it’s possible that the conventional wisdom about big accomplishment, which says getting started is the key to success, might be dead wrong.

It’s towards this unsettling notion that I turn your attention in this post.

My Scheduled Life

I’ve been at MIT for six years — the first five spent earning my PhD in computer science, and the last spent as a postdoctoral associate. Of the many things that surprised me about the Institute — a list which includes the alarming quantity of yelling and the inexpressible value of white boards — one that stands out is its dedication to meetings.

Here, for example, is a screen shot of my calendar from a typical week earlier this summer:

The events highlighted in red are regularly scheduled meetings associated with my research group, while the events highlighted in yellow are one-on-one research meetings I happened to schedule that week. They all involve the same activities: discussing research papers and debating — often vigorously — the ideas they spawn.

This calendar highlights a reality of life at MIT: discussion and brainstorming are a core component of our research process. It’s understood that only the best ideas can survive the submission process of top conferences like SIGCOMM, therefore a huge effort is invested in identifying the best possible projects before getting started. As seen on my calendar above, it’s not unusual to dedicate 6 or more hours a week in formal brainstorming meetings, with at least another 6 – 12 spent exploring on your own time.

At MIT, the quality of the idea is everything.

Ideas vs. Progress

Notice that MIT’s idea-centric process (e.g., finding the right ideas is key) contrasts with the progress-centric process (e.g., getting started is key) that dominates popular discussion on getting things done.

For example:

  • Proponents of the progress-centric process says “getting started” is the most important step. To paraphrase a commentator on a past article I wrote on this subject: “You will fail at 100% of the opportunities you never try!”
  • Proponents of the idea-centric process, by contrast, note that the vast majority of ideas are mediocre. If you jump at every concept that seems viable, you’ll probably end up accomplishing little of consequence.
  • Proponents of the progress-centric process fear that they must tell people to get started right away, or these (hypothetical) others will remain mired in a procrastinatory sea of fear and comfort with conformity. To paraphrase another commenter: “Most folks just sit around waffling on everything and thus don’t do anything except complain about the status quo.”
  • Proponents of the idea-centric process aren’t interested in the psychological issues of other people; they want the unvarnished truth on what will maximize their chances of success.
  • Proponents of the progress-centric process believe that the only way to test out an idea is to try it. To quote Scott Young (an insightful observer on these topics): “While you can learn something about a field by sitting on the sidelines, you won’t truly know about it until you dive right in.”
  • Proponents of the idea-centric process believe that in many fields, deep knowledge and expert feedback can differentiate between mediocre and great ideas. This requires a time-consuming commitment to learning about a field and a thick skin for harsh feedback, but you’d be hard pressed, for example, to find a successful serial entrepreneur, writer, or researcher who would start a project before feeling strongly about its chances for success.

In practice, this leads to the following types of difference:

  • A progress-centric person who has an interesting idea for a book jumps right into writing it, while an idea-centric person runs the idea through a wringer — talking to agents and writers, looking for similar works that have sold recently, etc. — before deciding to invest the years required to write and market it.
  • A progress-centric person quits his job to start his on blog-based online business, assuming he’ll figure out the details as he goes along, while an idea-centric person invests the months — maybe years — of hard work necessary to find a business idea with a real chance of supporting him, understanding that the right answer might be for him to build a valuable skill before going freelance.
  • A progress-centric person spends a month getting the small business she works for a strong Twitter presence, because that’s the thing to do, while an idea-centric person spends the same month studying more successful firms in their space, trying to identify what they’re doing better that could be efficiently replicated.
  • And so on…

Hypothetical situations, of course, can only take us so far. Let’s continue with two real world examples of idea-centric thinking in action…

The Difficulty of Finding Good Ideas: From Admissions to Animation

Earlier this summer I published a book on the college admission process. Its premise is simple: most people believe that getting accepted at a top college requires a stressful high school life; to counter this dangerous myth, I tell the stories of students who did well in the process while leading a low-stress and interesting life.

To the outside observer, the idea seems clear and obvious, therefore they likely assume the difficult part of this project was forcing myself to actually write. Reality, however, defies this assumption.

To see why, consider this screen shot from my e-mail archive:

Shown above are two crucial e-mails relating to my book. The earlier message, titled “one more…,” is from a conversation with my agent about potential book ideas. It contains my first reference to the idea of tackling college admissions as a book subject. (In the e-mail, I say: “One of the hottest issues right now is that of overachieving students burning out in their…quest to get into the right college…[but] many of the top students I interview…to put it simply, [are] relaxed.”)

The later e-mail, titled “Broadway Deal,” marks the Broadway Books imprint of Random House buying my book proposal. (Remember, for non-fiction, you sell the idea before you write the book; this e-mail timestamps me selling the idea, with all of the writing coming later.)

Notice the gap between the two dates. I started investigating the topic of college admissions in April of 2007 and didn’t complete and sell my final book proposal until October of 2008 — a span of 18 months!

(I’m not alone in this dedication to getting a book idea right; Ramit told me, for example, that it took him nine months to get from the general idea of writing his personal finance book to a specific 10-page outline.)

This same lesson keeps turning up the more you seek it. Consider, to name another example, the creative process behind the spectacular success of Pixar Animation Studios, which has an outrageously high average international gross of $550 million. In a Wired Magazine cover article, penned by Jonah Lehrer, it’s revealed that the Pixar team is obsessed with getting their movie just right before diving into the business of actually making it.

They start, for example, with a series of intense story discussions in a Pixar-owned cabin, located 50 miles north of San Francisco. For Toy Story 3, it took 123 days between the start of this process and the completion of their first story board. This story board was then turned into a story reel (an animated flip book version of the movie where employees provide the voice acting). Using the reel, the team brutally dissects and improves the script, remaking the reel with each tweak, until the movie flows smoothly — every joke hitting, every plot point unfolding logically.

Up to this point, very little money has been invested. Only once the reel is perfect do they actual start the long and expensive process of animating frames and recording professional voices.

Your Personal R&D Lab

What’s the right way to integrate the idea-centric process into your own work flow? I want to conclude with a few practical guidelines for moving away from The Cult of the Start and embracing the importance of finding the right idea.

  • Learn the Field
    The ability to distinguish between mediocre and good ideas requires that you understand your field. In some fields this might require diving into a series of (probably) mediocre starter projects to get a feel for how things work. In many fields, however, talking to insiders and finding examples of both good and bad projects (and understanding the difference), can take you surprisingly far.
  • Seek Feedback
    Find people who know what they are talking about and ask for their unvarnished opinion on your idea. Assume most of your ideas will get shot down. (At MIT, for example, I assume a ratio of 1 paper for every 6 – 10 ideas that I give serious thought towards.) This is okay; even top idea generators expect a low hit rate.
  • Be Specific
    Establish a specific routine for systematically sorting through and exploring potential ideas. If you don’t have a routine, it’s easy to default to doing nothing at all. This routine should include regular exposure to material related to your field (for a writer, for example, this might mean subscribing to Publisher’s Lunch and keeping tabs on what’s selling and who’s writing it). Have a separate routine to follow after an idea passes a viability threshold. This routine should involve both harsh expert feedback and a thorough search for people who have done something similar (and their fate).
  • Seek Compulsion, Not (Internal) Consistency
    Your threshold for acting on idea should be an indefatigable compulsion to get started. That is, after looking at the idea from many different angles, comparing it to similar works, and seeking expert feedback, if it still seems strong: get started. Most people, by contrast, act on any idea that seems internally consistent. That should be your criteria for starting to investigate an idea, not your threshold for action. (Notice, defining this threshold is one of the hardest challenges of the idea-centric approach, and is something that requires practice and experience. If you want to see a well-defined threshold in action, talk to a venture capitalist — they are among the world’s experts on sorting the potentially big — no one, of course, can predict certain success — from the probably small.)

Conclusion

If your goal is to increase the speed that you churn through your project list, then this advice is not for you — the sooner you get started on optimizing your TweekDeck configuration, or whatever, the better. The same applies for lifestyle changes (be it a new fitness program or learning a new language): these can be important projects in your life, but they’re not the type of accomplishment where the quality of the idea matters — so ignore what I say here.

On the other hand, when you’re talking about lasting accomplishment — the type you’ll be remembered for — it’s hard to avoid the reality that great ideas require a great investment of time to uncover. The sooner you make peace with this mindset — even if it means waiting longer before quitting your job to become an entrepreneur or diving into your brilliant book idea — the sooner you can start making important things happen.

Cal Newport’s latest book, How to Be a High School Superstar is ostensibly about hacking the stress out of the college admissions process, but is secretly a guide for anyone interested in building a more interesting life.

0

Related Articles

standard post picture

Starting back from zero

If I had to do it all over again, could I? If I had to start my business over -- ...

Read More
standard post picture

How to ask for a favor (and get what you want)

Every year on my birthday, I ask my readers to do me a simple favor. I tell them to leave ...

Read More

118 Comments

0
 

Leave a Reply

118 Comments on "“You just need to get started” is bad advice"

Notify of
avatar

Sort by:   newest | oldest
Angela of Neglected Princess
5 years 11 months ago

Fascinating article! I have spent more years than I care to count starting new projects and spinning my wheels. I have finally come to the realization that I should do some research before investing blood, sweat, tears, time and money in another project.

Here’s my question: what if your field does not exist? What if no one is doing or writing about or studying what you want to do/ write/ study? Should you take that as a big-ass HINT and move on- or should you have faith that you are a trailblazer and one of your ideas will stick?

Alex Dumitru
5 years 11 months ago

That’s a very interesting articles. Also I’ve found out some things I was really curious about 🙂

Dee
5 years 11 months ago
Good article, and I agree sometimes its true we should think before we start, but for the overthingking majority I believe they should just start, or as I have seen many of them will just give up. Angela you are right, researchis key before the blood sweat and tears or it might just be a waste, but if you have done your research, have had some expert opinion (not friends and family who tell you your idea is great) – then if you are still convinced go for it. Some things in life are unknown, but if your have all… Read more »
Kelly
5 years 11 months ago

I can’t help but think of one of Gretchen Rubin’s favorite sayings: The opposite of a great truth is also true. Some people just need to get started and others need to focus in on getting the details right.

The real take away here is to take a look at your own projects and determine if you haven’t gotten started or if you haven’t gotten serious about making it work.

Joni
Joni
5 years 11 months ago

Very well said!

M. K. Ali
5 years 11 months ago
While i have found worthy interest in the real world examples that Cal sites, it feels like he’s making just as cogent an argument for the proponents of “just getting started.” The only notable hair to split would seem to be how one should start as opposed to whether “just getting started” should be debunked as a common sense and apparently effective strategy for other real world successful types. The journey of a thousand miles or 123 hours or cabin-fever or 365-days of strategic analysis to a treatment/proposal begins with the first step. I contend that often that first step… Read more »
Leigh
5 years 11 months ago

I think it’s a question of scale. A project like writing a book and a project like learning yoga require different approaches. It’s completely fair to be idea-centric when it comes to larger projects that require a lot of energy. But I also think it’s good to be progress-centric when you run into emotional roadblocks on particular projects. You need both; it’s a balance sort of deal. The trick is learning when to take which approach.

Great guest post.

Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

That’s a really good way of thinking about it. When it comes to reorganizing your spice drawer, or whatever, either shit or get off the pot.

By contrast, if you’re going to quit your job to start a business, that’s worth some more thought first.

Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago
This article is just plain dumb. The author defines “just getting started” too narrowly: eg. the person who quits his job and jumps into a business idea without thinking. But even the “idea centric” person needs to “get started.” They just get started differently: they do their research by studying and theorizing, while the “progress centric” person starts by trying it out. It seems the main difference between an “idea centric” and a “progress centric” is PROCESS. And I’m not convinced, based on the author’s logic, that one is better than another. QUOTE: “You’d be hard pressed…to find a successful… Read more »
K00kyKelly
5 years 11 months ago

Yes, totally agree. This article is really about HOW to get started. Cal dances around the problem of not getting started (doing nothing) but never really addresses it.

Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago

I used the word (maybe incorrectly), because it opens with, as Tyler as commented below, a “dumbed down” premise: “You just need to get started is bad advice.”

I can turn that around as well: “Is it bad advice, or do you just disagree with it?”

In both cases you and I used a strong word (“dumb,” and “bad”) to express a strong sentiment.

Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

Of course the main difference is “process.” I am presenting two different processes for trying to accomplish influential results, and I’m arguing that the idea-centric process works better.

(And you’re crazy if you think Google doesn’t puts a fantastic amount of due diligence into their acquisition decisions.)

Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago

Cal: thanks for the response. If Google puts so much due diligence into its ideas, how come so many are losers?

From a “making money perspective;” Google ads continues to be the only winner.

Isn’t “idea centric” supposed to produce better results?

Hal O'Brien
Hal O'Brien
5 years 11 months ago
“If Google puts so much due diligence into its ideas, how come so many are losers?” Because sometimes even due diligence isn’t enough. Look, it’s like the full version of Sturgeon’s Law. When asked why he wrote that crappy science fiction stuff, his reply was, “Yes, 90% of science fiction is crap, but 90% of *everything* is crap.” 90% of ideas vetted with due diligence will fail, but 90% of *all* ideas will fail. (This, by the way, is why Jim Collins of “Good to Great” is such a misleading writer. I’ve never heard of him looking at companies that… Read more »
Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago

Hal: but isn’t the point of Cal’s article that ideas that go through the “due diligence” process, and are then “launched,” will have a higher success rate?

Hal O'Brien
Hal O'Brien
5 years 11 months ago
Higher, but not necessarily high. I’m reminded of a tag line for NeXTStep: “The easiest to use UNIX ever!” Not “easy,” mind you — just easier than the other guys. 6% survival would be an improvement to 5% — but it would still give rise to the phenomenon you’ve noted at Google where “so many” ideas fail. My point is, “So many compared to whom? Why are you so convinced that’s actually a high failure rate?” (This raises the meta-question about argumentation these days… Not many people I see are able to wrap their minds around “-er” comparisons well. They… Read more »
Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago

Hal: you said “the other benefit to vetting would be those ideas that do survive are of a higher quality.”

Ok, I’ll bite: how do we determine if an idea is of “higher quality?”

I say, in business, “higher quality” means a viable, profitable product. Is there any research, in business, that shows that going through Cal’s process will produce these types of ideas?

Hal O'Brien
Hal O'Brien
5 years 11 months ago
“Ok, I’ll bite: how do we determine if an idea is of “higher quality?”” No idea. It’s wholly subjective. Like Justice Stewart, though, I know it when I see it. “I say, in business, “higher quality” means a viable, profitable product.” Ah. An optimist. That’s an idea more honoured in the breach than in the observance. In most businesses, at least in the way you’re talking, “higher quality” means it flatters one superiors. Any profit it makes beyond that is a happy accident. “Is there any research, in business, that shows that going through Cal’s process will produce these types… Read more »
Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago
Hal: You think I’m being “contrarian on a pro forma basis?” I don’t think so: I’ve challenged, from the beginning, that WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING MONEY, a PROGRESS centric approach isn’t necessarily better than an IDEA centric one. This blog is about making money. That means profit. On a blog about money, Cal’s approach needs to be evaluated based on whether it INCREASES the rate of profits for a company, individual, or product. I haven’t said anything about “flattery of one’s superiors.” I’m just talking about which ideas make money, and which don’t. If Google releases a PRODUCT and… Read more »
Hal O'Brien
Hal O'Brien
5 years 11 months ago
“You think I’m being “contrarian on a pro forma basis?” I don’t think so…” I see what you did there. Quite funny; quite droll. Skipping most of the rest of your demonstration-by-example of what pro forma means, we get to: “… this blog is called I Will Teach You to be Rich (we’re talking about making money).” It’s true, it is called that. But, again, given that neither you, nor Ramit, nor anyone else I’ve noticed here actually *is* rich (at least, according to Forbes), and therefore there doesn’t appear to be any empirical experience being shared, I assumed the… Read more »
John Brougher
5 years 11 months ago
Dr. Newport’s guest post here is really well thought-out, but I’m going to have to disagree with the principle in practice. To overgeneralize a bit, the people I know and work with need to be more progress-centric. Failure isn’t their issue. Their problem is not that they’ve started fifteen companies, each of which has struggled, or that twenty of their half-written articles or books have fallen flat. Their problem is that discussion of improving one’s life never turns to action. And that’s not necessarily their fault–we’re often trained from a very young age to endure through hard situations needlessly, focus… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your comment.

I want to note, however, that people’s psychological barriers to making change in their life is separate from the issue of what process has a better chance of producing influential results.

Tyler Wells, CPA
5 years 11 months ago

It’s unfortunate that a great concept has to be opened with a stupid premise to get people to read it. Controversy sells, not quality, and thus the heading “You just need to get started is bad advice.” Clearly the quality of the thought process is hugely important in the result, but you’ll never get there if you don’t get started, make mistakes, and refine your idea on the way.

Peter
5 years 11 months ago
I liked this article but something that stuck me was the definition of “getting started”. It wasn’t explicitly defined and I think its reference was ambiguous – Cal seems to imply that “getting started” actually means “launching your product”. For example, the reference to Pixar – I could argue they did “just get started”, they went to the cabin and started brainstorming and carving the idea. With regards to you, Ramit, you did “just get started” by researching the book idea, testing the market etc. In both examples, action was taken right away but it was a specific kind of… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

It’s a good point, because the boundary of what constitutes “getting started” can be loose.

In this article, I meant getting started to mean fixing a particular idea and starting the process of “producing it.” In research, this means actually starting to build a system or prove a theorem; in movies, this means hiring the crew; in business, this means setting up the infrastructure, polishing the product, etc. In essence, I’m arguing to spend more time sifting through ideas before this fixing stage.

Jim E.
Jim E.
5 years 11 months ago
I think it’s fascinating how he’s overlooked in his idea centric matrix the system at MIT for generating idea’s in institutionalized (and is institutionalized in other schools and studies). My wife is a professor, she has to generate the same exact thing. Through her phd studies this entire process also took place. I gaurantee that this training in idea concept holds in all top level research universities. Additionally my sister is a novelist. Took creative writing through school. The exact same approach in terms of idea generation and vetting also took place (they call it workshopping). The higher up in… Read more »
Hal
5 years 11 months ago

MY personal problem is finding that group of “peers” to vet my idea. If I’m not part of group who reviews my idea? If I put it out there in some public forum I’m liable to get as many “greats” as I get “dumb”. How do readers on this site vet their ideas? Who do they include? Family? Friends? Strangers?

I’d love help “workshopping” an idea but don’t know who to invite.

David Kadavy
5 years 11 months ago

At first I was really skeptical, but after reading the article, I think I could benefit from following some of this advice. I’m very much a “progress-centric.”

But, being “progress-centric” can help someone develop the experience and knowledge necessary to envision a project of grand scale. So, there’s still hope for us.

Jenni
Jenni
5 years 11 months ago

What an excellent article. I’d say that “seeking feedback” is the most important component of the idea-centric model. Whether it’s your research article, a book proposal, or a reel for a movie, collaboration with others is essential to refining or rejecting an idea.

Brad
Brad
5 years 11 months ago
The whole concept of “idea-centric” vs “progress-centric” feels fabricated. Every project starts with an idea and at some point moves into a progress or execution phase (and then jumps back and forth between the two for the life of the project). Even then, good luck telling the two apart. Take Cal’s example of Toy Story 3 as “idea-centric.” Let’s pretend they had implemented it being “progress-centric.” What looks different? Absolutely nothing. They would have had their meetings, drawn their sketches, improved the plot and the jokes, and then actually built it. What would be really interesting (and much more applicable… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

Another way of wording the articles thesis: before getting started, ask yourself: “is this really the right idea to get started with?”

The Toy Story 3 writers arrived at the Pixar cabin with a plot line worked out for the movie. After a few days they scrapped it. A progress-centric person would have said: “hey, we got an idea that works, lets stop navel gaving and make a movie!”

Brad
Brad
5 years 11 months ago
Cal, Agreed on the alternate thesis. I guess where it breaks down a little for me (and I have a feeling it is probably a matter of semantics) is the point of “getting started.” For me, Deciding to do a Toy Story 3 = The Idea Writing the first plot line = Just getting started Going to the Pixar Cabin, scrapping the plot line, plus the subsequent iterations and improvements = Emphasis on Quality Full scale production = It’s good enough to mass produce It seems like for you Deciding to do a Toy Story 3, writing the first plot… Read more »
Lee Semel
5 years 11 months ago
This isn’t a blank-and white issue. I disagree with the idea that it’s always great to get started right away as much as I disagree with the idea that it’s always a good idea to wait and put every idea through a wringer If you’re looking for a single killer idea that you’ll be spending years working, then I agree that it’s important to put it through the wringer. Planning your big project by systematically exploring the universe of ideas for the best makes a lot of sense in that case, especially if you already have a good deal of… Read more »
Zia Hassan
Zia Hassan
5 years 11 months ago
I think a lot of you have nailed it – both the approaches compared in this post are technically designed to move ahead with a project. Whether that means actually diving in and getting hands dirty, or doing your homework first. The latter just minimizes risk (and even that is arguable). The thing I’ve always noticed is that I introduce ideas sometimes that “experts” think are bad ideas, or that I don’t feel terribly confident about, and that my friends think suck, etc… And then I learn to trust the idea and work with it, and some of those ideas… Read more »
trackback

[…] Now, Cal (an MIT student) is back with a guest post covering the topic in more detail over at I Will Teach You To Be Rich, called “You Just Need to Get Started is Bad Advice” and you can read it here. […]

Chris Parsons
5 years 11 months ago

I disagree with this completely. I think Cal’s advice is geared to his own unique situation, and is really not applicable to most business people. There is no implementation in academics – all they have is ideas, so of course ideas matter more in that field. In the business world, even a mediocre idea can be very profitable. Further, research and due diligence are a part of action and implementation – these are not mutually exclusive. The advice to “just get started” certainly isn’t meant to imply that businesses should be started with no planning!

ahow628
5 years 11 months ago

This has been quite three debated topic recently. We’ve discussed it over in B1k and now Lifehacker just pushed another article about it:
http://lifehacker.com/5637778/counterpoint-getting-started-is-not-overrated-its-just-not-for-everyone

Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

That article on Lifehacker is one I wrote a couple years ago (and linked to in the post here on Ramit’s site.) In a turn of coincidence, they reposted it around the same time my guest post went live here.

ahow628
5 years 11 months ago

Yeah, Cal, I had seen it the first time they posted it before I had started doing any freelancing and I was scoffing at it. It is amazing how my feelings on it have changed. Personally, I’ve had to find a middle ground between avoiding planning to perfection and avoid work altogether.

To clarify, the article I linked to above is a new one from today. It is by a Lifehacker Australia writer.

Thanks for the guest post. Ramit always makes excellent choices.

Stanley Lee
5 years 11 months ago
Cal, I noticed how consistent the regular meetings are. I’ve noticed from my undergrad research assistant experience that my advisors ended up either rambling on too long in a meeting (i.e. making 1 hour meeting into 2+ hours), or got too busy that they didn’t meet to talk about potential ideas to pursue for publications. Back to the main point. Getting started is overrated, except when doing it blindly like a progress-centric person. It’s getting started on the right that have been tested for its validity w/o blowing off excessive commitments on testing. Too invested in the wrong ideas can… Read more »
Dustin Sanchez
5 years 11 months ago

good point stanley, i know ppl from law school with clubs on their resume that they never even attended. inevitably the interviewee asks, so what did you do in the Young Law Student’s association? And the answer is well i went to a meeting or two but nothing actually worth putting on my resume. talk about credential burn

Ben Shive
5 years 11 months ago

I had difficulty with this because ‘just get started’ doesn’t mean that you blindly forge ahead and fail to do your homework. I write software. I might say to myself, wouldn’t it be awesome if there was a website that did X&Y? If a google search turns up an already-popular one that does both, there’s no point. But I ‘got started’ and made the effort to investigate first.

Jesse
5 years 11 months ago

@Ben, I don’t know. Sometimes having competitors in the space is validation that you could do well there!

I used the fact that I found a few other competitors out there selling “my idea” as a proof of concept. I just thought I could sell mine better, so I forged ahead 🙂

Anthony
5 years 11 months ago

I think small projects could be given more of the “progress-centric” approach – get it to 80% and get it out the door. Now, if you’re working on large or important project, something that takes significant time, energy, or resources, then absolutely – give it 10x the thought. Brought up some great issues with how you allocate your time, thanks!

Dustin Sanchez
5 years 11 months ago

Even the idea centric approach has a gigantic progress centric component to it. All the research that takes place b4 acting on your idea has to be “started” at some point. You can look at the daunting task ahead and decide to put off researching the best solution or you can just get started with your preliminary research. At some point, whether you call it progress centric or idea centric you have to overcome the momentum of procrastination, at some point u have to act.

Stanley Lee
5 years 11 months ago

@Dustin: Even if you did put in the effort, the recruiters (or potential grad school advisors) don’t give a shit b/c they are not relevant to the ultimate output (either profit for the employer or publications for the research lab group). I am going to have a guest post about it fairly soon on Martin Hughes’s University Blog.

@Cal: By the way, hope you have fun watching the video or reading about it. You provided a lot of inspiration for my epiphany on my stupidity on it.

Dustin Aaron Sanchez
5 years 11 months ago

@Stanley Lee: I’ll be waiting for that blog. Lots of ppl tend to spend a lot of time focusing on what doesn’t matter. including myself sometimes

Stanley Lee
5 years 11 months ago

@Dustin: If you have subscribed to my blog, here they are:

http://bit.ly/aQeT9H <— Part 1 as a guest post on the University blog
http://goo.gl/fb/4uDQq <– Part 2 on my blog as a video

Kelly A
Kelly A
5 years 11 months ago
Really fascinating stuff Cal! I love hearing about your process and understanding how I can apply this is my own freelancing work. As a former debate student I’m used to spending 9 months out of the year studying and preparing for 10-12 weekends of intense competition. The process is similar to what you described – looking at options to the resolution and developing strategies and arguments. It’s fascinating. But I think it’s a little different process than what you’re describing, searching for a blockbuster SIGCOMM paper or book deal. I prefer the debate method. You go into the first tournament… Read more »
Postdoc
Postdoc
5 years 11 months ago
I’m another academic who does a lot of theory and modeling, and the approach I see the most successful senior researchers using is slightly different from what you describe here. First and foremost, they work on important problems. This is obvious. Second, they spread the risk of their projects over multiple postdocs and grad students. This is also obvious. Third, while the structure of funding requires that at least some of their ideas are extremely well justified before the work is started, they are usually pursuing some exploratory, low-investment projects on the side. In short, they use the old ‘exploit-and-explore’… Read more »
Postdoc
Postdoc
5 years 11 months ago
A small follow-up is that, thinking back on comments received from colleagues and especially during peer review, a lot of important work is initiated, completed, and published despite opposition from a sizable minority. It’s important not to seek unanimous approval or support before working–this is especially critical if one is doing something novel on an important issue. Some of the papers seen now as most central in my field were first published in no-name journals because initial opposition was so great. Of course, crappy ideas will face a lot of opposition too. What’s key is brainstorming with people who are… Read more »
Jim E.
Jim E.
5 years 11 months ago

I believe in the business world this phenomena is known more as “an idea ahead of it’s time”. Thus the repackaging of older products that suddenly become wildly successful because there simply wasn’t a market for them before. The same thing can happen with idea’s in science. What was seen as “dead end” research can suddenly have huge applications with the advent of new technology, or new emphasis on needs.

Gal @ Equally Happy
5 years 11 months ago

I think he’s got some good point but I still think the “get started” method is better in most cases. If you look at many successful entrepreneurs, they didn’t have the perfect idea when they got started. They had an idea, then ran with it and they kept adapting their idea as they encountered new challenges and opportunities. Sometimes, the best way to test out an idea is to try it.

That said, I do agree with doing research, just not so much of it that you end up crippling yourself.

Satya Colombo, Fierce Wisdom
5 years 11 months ago
There’s definitely a danger in getting lost in over-analysis. I’m a big proponent of the just get it out there approach, even though i’m often guilty of getting lost in over-thinking everything. I liked Seth’s approach in this recent post: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/09/the-myth-of-preparation.html I’d say, the more clear, thorough and well-versed you are on your market, through research, testing, discussing, delving in, the better your project/idea will succeed regardless. The irony is: sometimes you gotta just get that sucker out, so you can test in action and through experience. You’ve got to be willing to fail, or risk ‘perfect’ keeping you in… Read more »
trackback

[…] Sethi of Iwillteachyoutoberich.com has a great guest post from MIT post-doctoral associate Cal Newport. Newport counters the popular idea that “you […]

Jeff Wong
5 years 11 months ago

Interesting perspective. I appreciate the idea and look forward to reading more of the debate (when it settles a bit in a week or month).

Paul
5 years 11 months ago
Just wanted to chime in. Freaking awesome argument about why getting started really is overrated. I see a lot of people (myself include) just dive into a new business ideas expecting that it will either make money – or if the idea sucks – fall back on the belief that it will just be a learning experience. Yeah you might learn alot, but why not learn and be successful at the same time. For example I see so many useless apps on the iphone market right now. How much time and money did these people invest in developing these programs… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

That’s a good example. Sure, you learn about programming from building an app, but you learn the same building a useful app, and get so much more.

Nate
Nate
5 years 11 months ago
Honestly I think this article misses the mark. The author seems to have a vendetta against the mediocre, but most things and people in this world are mediocre. I feel like in most cases it’s a better start a business with a mediocre idea and iterate until you get it right than wait for the killer idea that may never come at all, or that you might not have the nuts-and-bolts skills to implement due to not having gained them implementing poorer ideas. In college I was surrounded by people with amazing ideas who had no idea how to go… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

I don’t have a “vendetta” against the medicore, I just happen to be most interested in writing about the exceptional. I’m sure there are other writers out their who cover the art of being mediocre well, it just doesn’t happen to be my thing.

Also, I leave people’s psychological issues as a different problem. I’m writing about what processes are behind big successes. Motivating people to work is a different issue, and one I’m less interested in.

KMichel
KMichel
5 years 11 months ago

I just like that this article made me analyze how I work, and what I might do to make it better. You could argue both ways and not get anywhere, because really, you need a little of both.

Fable Fox
5 years 11 months ago
Now that is a very interesting article, since I just quit my day job myself. Anyway, I didn’t quit because i want to focus on my animation project (http://www.fablefoxisstronger.com) or plan to make money on blog (http://www.fablefox.com). It was more on health and study reason. I quit because of personal and work reason, and I will be doing freelance translation, among others simple multimedia works. Work and lack of time flexibility always block me from focusing on my bigger project. There are a saying big people focus on big thing, small people focus on small thing. I think it’s time… Read more »
Rizwan
5 years 11 months ago

Great post.

I’ve been referred to as a slow-starter, procrastinator, ‘dragging my feet’, even introverted, etc simply because I relish the idea-centric approach. A few months ago I wrote a toast for my brother’s wedding– something I’ve never had to do. To my surprise it absolutely killed. It had punchline after punchline mixed with sentiment and more punchlines. It took me six days to write 1 word– only thirty minutes more to write the next 1,582 and ten minutes more later that same day to stand and deliver an awesome, crowd-slaying speech.

Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

Another great example. Excellence takes time.

Jessica
5 years 11 months ago

I am probably the type of person who over analyze everything. I have to research, then get started. Sometimes I research so much I get in my own way.

Jacq @ Single Mom, Rich Mom
5 years 11 months ago

Tesla on Edison:
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”

Different m.o.’s but one could argue that Edison was more successful. Above all, both didn’t just get started, but persevered and adjusted as they went along – and finished, which is more critical than starting.

Jes
5 years 11 months ago
This post reminds of the book I just read over the weekend: “BRAINSTORM: Harnessing the Power of Productive Obsessions” by Eric Maisel The phrase “Just get started” deflates rapidly. Sounds like a bound to fail 12 stepper to me! Getting motivated shouldn’t take that much effort. Eric Maisel’s book Brainstorm makes an excellent point in how the idea “obsession” is viewed negatively. This very readable book makes the distinction between “unproductive obsessions” (i.e, worrying) to “productive obsessions” (i.e., Hey, making that online portfolio and querying a few places really works!) Brainstorm is about thinking, but not in a dumbed down… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

That’s a great book recommendation. I’ll have to read that.

Aaron
Aaron
5 years 11 months ago

This is an awesome article — I now have at least 9-18 months breathing room before I have to do something! 😉

But generally I agree with Nate above — there are a lot of mediocre people making a good living with mediocre products because they got moving.

I have problems getting moving because I get paralyzed and then do nothing. It’s even happening now in my Earn1K course.

maria
5 years 11 months ago
I loved this article! My favorite one on IWTYTBR so far. I think a huge mistake people make is thinking “oh I have a great idea, now I better get it a domain name and get my LLC” only to find that the idea is not realistic. This article is a wonderful reminder to slow it down, brainstorm, reach out to others in the field, brainstorm some more and get to different methods of research besides Wikipedia to see if your idea is any good. Ramit- I think you need to lighten up on your article titles! “why this is… Read more »
Maria Brilaki
5 years 11 months ago
The progress-centric approach and the idea-centric approach can be united depending on the definition of idea-debating and progress-making. Preparing to launch a business by doing market research, or attending meetings to discuss the right idea IS progress. As long as you can keep track of this, keeping record of updates and results that narrow down your options and enable you to “get it right”, i.e., results that lead you somewhere, then you are making steps forward. Most experts tell you to “just get started” so that you stop daydreaming or nagging and actually DO something. When claiming that you are… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

True enough. Sometimes, however, the “progress” in an idea-centric approach is much less obvious. I literally just walked away from an hour long, rambling conversation with a colleague, that, from the outside, looked like a waste of time, but, in reality, was a crucial part of the long hard process of figuring out a section of a paper we’re writing.

Keith
5 years 11 months ago
Clearly, a huge number of the comments could have benefited from some of Cal’s advice. So many of the folks posting comments “just did it”, that they missed the point. Just getting started is when you do not have the specific knowledge to get to a high level of refinement, and you expect to fail…over and over until you find your right idea. Cal’s process does this in a more rigorous manner, and in a lab setting instead of in the target market. Further, Earn1K is not about “just getting started”. It is about finding the right idea, and about… Read more »
Justin Jackson
5 years 11 months ago
Part of the problem here might come down to where people are coming from. Much of Cal’s advice, and examples, comes from the academic world. But when we’re talking about the *business* world, I don’t think his arguments hold as much weight. You can research and research, and plan and plan, but it won’t necessarily produce a better business. The reason? Until something is off the ground in the business world, it’s hard to predict how customers will react. I think a better strategy is to launch the idea soon, and see how people react to it. The entrepreneurs behind… Read more »
Keith
5 years 11 months ago
Justin, The story about Crate and Barrel seems to show that even today, the founder does not understand why he made such a success. The fact is he knew more than he is admitting. First, he says that “he figured other young couples felt the same way”, which indicates that he knew who his potential customers were, and how they thought…because he was one of them. So he started with a great idea (relative to his perfect customer) not a lame idea that he just pushed forward with passion. He also new about service-based business, so he was not a… Read more »
Kathryn
Kathryn
5 years 11 months ago
Cal is consistent, he is not of interest to the lazy man, his articles talk about being so good that they can’t ignore you or mastering something to the point where you are the best in your niche. People are afraid of that, it’s stressful to think about because he encourages a lot of hard work, they feel lazy if they don’t actually take his advice. But that’s their choice, if they want to be mediocre, it’s completely acceptable….. I mean really, how would the excellent people really stand out then? Anyway, Cal is arguing that you need to put… Read more »
SYOBO_Works
5 years 11 months ago
I find a profound flaw in the fundamental premise that this article embraces in not making a distinction but rather asserting without acknowledgment a separation between what is essentially a heuristic process relative to an algorithmic process. By not making a distinction but asserting a separation I mean that the author insists in making what he calls the “process-centric” experience something apart from what he calls the “idea-process” experience. This is huge and a false premise in his argument. It is huge because the difference between making a distinction vs. a separation is like the difference between life and death.… Read more »
Cal Newport
5 years 11 months ago

Algorithms and heuristics are not too different things. An algorithm is a specific sequence of steps for achieving some goal. A heuristic is an evaluation tool that’s approximates a goal, as oppose to precisely accomplishing it. Many algorithms use heuristics. I’m not sure how one separates ideations processes, of all things, into “algorithmic” versus “heuristic?”

Kyle
Kyle
5 years 11 months ago

It’s “educated writing” like this that makes me want to puke every time someone thinks they are better than another just because they have a higher degree. Thank you Cal for writing clearly, understanding the audience, and not blathering on in paragraph long sentences that could be written much more clearly (espoused with greater clarity and prose).

Brad
Brad
5 years 11 months ago

Not sure exactly what he or she is trying to say, but it reminds me of this scene from Billy Madison: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEkWH8DB7b0

SYOBO_Works
5 years 11 months ago

Plain English Translation: It means that thinkers and doers of necessity complement rather than rival each other, and it’s presumptuous to assert that one is better than the other.

Rizwan
5 years 11 months ago

in short– arguing for the sake of arguing.

SYOBO_Works
5 years 11 months ago

In short – arguing a point for those who care to listen.

Molly Maguire
Molly Maguire
5 years 11 months ago

Horses for courses. If it is a matter of cleaning up the mess in your house, then “just get started” is fair advice. If you want to become a professional cellist, then it is obviously nonsense, and you would need to become properly trained.

Honey
Honey
5 years 11 months ago

I get what everyone’s saying as far as the definition of “getting started” being vague and potentially applicable to any process that will move a project forward. It seems like the real thesis to the article, then, is “how can I structure ‘getting-started’ in a way that enables me to move ALL projects forward while delaying the allocation of finite resources to ANY of those projects unless/until I’m confident there will be a payoff?”

But then, that’s a far less catchy headline 🙂

trackback
5 years 11 months ago

[…] you’ve been solidly spanked, figure out what you’re going to do better. This post from I Will Teach You To Be Rich isn’t full of search engine optimization tips or anything. It’s about harnessing your […]

Kit
Kit
5 years 11 months ago

The process vs. idea centric eval reminds me a lot of Ted Williams’ quote- “A good hitter can hit a pitch in a good spot three times better than a great hitter can hit a ball in a questionable spot”.

trackback
5 years 11 months ago

[…] you’ve been solidly spanked, figure out what you’re going to do better. This post from I Will Teach You To Be Rich isn’t full of search engine optimization tips or anything. It’s about harnessing your […]

trackback
[…] “You just need to get started” is bad advice | I Will Teach You To Be Rich – A progress-centric person who has an interesting idea for a book jumps right into writing it, while an idea-centric person runs the idea through a wringer — talking to agents and writers, looking for similar works that have sold recently, etc. — before deciding to invest the years required to write and market it.<br /> A progress-centric person quits his job to start his on blog-based online business, assuming he’ll figure out the details as he goes along, while an idea-centric… Read more »
trackback
[…] “You just need to get started” is bad advice | I Will Teach You To Be Rich A progress-centric person who has an interesting idea for a book jumps right into writing it, while an idea-centric person runs the idea through a wringer — talking to agents and writers, looking for similar works that have sold recently, etc. — before deciding to invest the years required to write and market it. A progress-centric person quits his job to start his on blog-based online business, assuming he’ll figure out the details as he goes along, while an idea-centric person invests… Read more »
trackback
[…] “You just need to get started” is bad advice | I Will Teach You To Be Rich A progress-centric person who has an interesting idea for a book jumps right into writing it, while an idea-centric person runs the idea through a wringer — talking to agents and writers, looking for similar works that have sold recently, etc. — before deciding to invest the years required to write and market it. A progress-centric person quits his job to start his on blog-based online business, assuming he’ll figure out the details as he goes along, while an idea-centric person invests… Read more »
trackback
5 years 11 months ago

[…] on something you don’t believe in. Cal Newport echoed something similar with his recent post on taking an idea-centric approach rather than one focused on progress and starting at all […]

Jack Startup
5 years 11 months ago

All of this is easy to say, but hard to work. What ever, for me incredible man is a Tony Robbins, wow he`s got incredible energy.
I know it`s not so easy be like him, it`s years work, but all is for people…

Mikael
Mikael
5 years 11 months ago
Cal’s post has stirred up some interest! As an avid reader of Cal’s work, it seems to me that the essence of this post is: 1) you need to work hard and smart – not just in the beginning of your career, but throughout your life 2) you need to appreciate learning and the value of feedback – whether in the form of peer review or market response 3) you really need to strengthen your ideas to a robust quality. The underlying idea of course is that you don’t work (solely) for money. You work because you think that what… Read more »
Keith
5 years 11 months ago

Mikael,

I like the fact that you tied this back to ethics…very good insight there. Sort of basic when you think about it, and the basics are things we should never forget, yet we often do.

Good summary as well!

Michael
5 years 11 months ago
I think one of the problems being though of in the background for some people is that for talented but not brilliant people, the issue of workshopping an idea (or even several ideas in parallel) for 18 months (probably while holding down a job) to produce an idea with a “90%” failure chance results in a mathematical scenario that isn’t very palatable…however I’m not offering any solution. And I know you’re not trying to get into the psychological issues. Forgetting extremes, I wonder if there is any consolation in expecting failed well workshopped ideas to have a better chance of… Read more »
Keith
5 years 11 months ago
Some folks above clearly think that progress centric is a better approach for business than idea centric. But I would ask you to think about this: The entire corporate world is progress centric, while speaking about quality vision such as “perfect one customer transaction, and then repeat it a million times”, or “put the customer first”, blah, blah blah. And this corporate style has small business following in their footsteps, bleating “visions” and “missions” yada, yada. Btu how many of these businesses actually improve their products and services over time? They change them, but change does not = improvement; improvement… Read more »
Sue Peterson
5 years 11 months ago
As a college professor and a coach of an intercollegiate speech and debate team, I really appreciate this article. I had not thought about it in these terms, but much of what I have been telling my college competitors over the last few years is that they will only go so far by “working hard,” without having the foundation to set that work upon (the knowledge of the topic, the reason the idea for an argument came about, the theory behind the way an argument is presented or refuted…). I also spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince… Read more »
Keith
5 years 11 months ago
Sue, Isn’t the driving force behind the “teaching to the test” approach, the inadequacy of the testing itself? The more rigorous the assessment, and the more sophisticated the correct answers must be, the more difficult it is to grade because it becomes harder to represent complex responses with colored in circles, or else you have to rely on more subjective or qualitative assessment (opinion). Stated another way, if the test consists of the list of “things you must know to pass”, then yeah, teaching to the test is sort of lame…and so is the test. But if the test consists… Read more »
Tassia
Tassia
5 years 11 months ago
Amazing serendipity. I just watched Stephen Johnson’s TED talk on “Where good ideas come from” and saw many parallels with Cal’s idea-centric process. It’s wonderful to see such indepth work being done about what really does happen leading up to great ideas. At one point, Johnson calls the extensive incubation period that seems to occur before many eureka moments as “the long hunch.” For me, Cal’s explanation is the next step (and possibly of greater value) because it deals with specific actions we can take, not just the overall notion of what is actually at work in spawning ideas. Johnson’s… Read more »
trackback

[…] Visit Ramit Sethi’s site, I will Teach you to be Rich and consider his guest, Cal Newport’s theory that posits, “You Just Need to get Started is Bad Advice.” […]

trackback

[…] Daniel Lock Today I read an interesting post by the very good Cal Newport, about the concept of not starting and instead focusing on the idea. Actually he advocates focusing on the quality of the idea and not […]

Santosh
Santosh
5 years 11 months ago
Great article and foreword! After giving it a full 2 minute thought I think both idea-centric and progress-centric ways can and probably should co-exist. Think of it in terms of a CTO who actually looks through various ideas from their R&D department and picks one that s/he thinks will be a money maker (idea-centric). S/he then hands it off to a Project Manager to make it happen (progress-centric). Clearly the idea-centric approach must come first if both are used. I don’t see how a progress-centric approach would come first unless you apply the progress-centric approach as a dependency within the… Read more »
Usama
5 years 11 months ago

The first is always the hardest one, but if you have your mindset and your goals in mind then stop thinking and start doing.

trackback

[…] second is an article titled “You just need to get started” is bad advice.  This was excellent article with some really well thought out comments by readers.  Here is a […]

trackback

[…] you’ve been solidly spanked, figure out what you’re going to do better. This post from I Will Teach You To Be Rich isn’t full of search engine optimization tips or anything. It’s about harnessing your […]

trackback

[…] TweetShareEmailIn a recent collaborative post, Ramit Sethi (Stanford) and Cal Newport (MIT) challenge the self-evident truth of ‘You just need to get started…” […]

Luqman Ismael
Luqman Ismael
5 years 11 months ago

Good post Cal.

I still think that idea-centric and progress-centric people need to co-exist for the organization to perform. They are not rivals.

Top management need to be more idea-centric (know the direction) while lower levels are more progress-centric (know the best execution).

Susie
Susie
5 years 11 months ago

I have spent a decade preparing for a career in insurance and financial services, but despite many appointments during the past 6 weeks have yet to sell a policy.

Marisa
Marisa
5 years 11 months ago
I think this oversimplifies. A lot of people have the problem where they cannot “just get started” because they are paralyzed by their perfectionist tendencies. People haven’t just had intellectual discussions to weight the pros and cons of their actions – people are so afraid to make a mistake they can’t bring themselves to begin. Mistakes are an inherent part of the learning process, and many would not have been anticipated no matter how long one thought over the issue. So while I agree that you should not leap headfirst into an important project, after a certain point deliberation has… Read more »
trackback

[…] Comment • Insert a dynamic date hereThere's a contrary viewpoint expressed here: http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich…Anon User • Insert a dynamic date hereCannot add comment at this time. Don't Miss New […]

Luis Fernando Imperator
5 years 10 months ago

Well, the thing is that sometimes you don’t need to have a great idea to make a successful business, you just need great execution. The world is full of great ideas that are never implemented and is also full of profitable bakeries and laundry shops.

trackback

[…] the differences between idea-centric and process-centric processes on Ramit Sethi’s blog I Will Teach You To Be Rich. For process-centric ideas, the consequences of getting started without doing sufficient homework […]

trackback

[…] when they occur. This requires that you constrain the other obligations in your life — perhaps by being reluctant to agree to things or start projects, or by ruthlessly batching and streamlining your regular […]

wpDiscuz