Hacker News Reader

Comment by bitexploder | Hacker News Reader

Reminds me of commander Chris Hadfields philosophy of always aiming to be a Zero. He said in any environment you could be a -1 a 0 or a +1. You don't get to decide which of those your efforts end up being. He further observes coming into a new environment and doing too much or trying to overachieve can often just make a mess, making you a -1. Aim to be a zero. Stack those shelves, do the boring work you know you can do well until you are sure you can handle the more complex chores. Also sort of reminds me of Net Promoter Score; would you recommend X to friends and family?

Just do the thing that is the point of the place and do the shit out of it, why wouldn't you? -- Louis CK

There is wisdom in hard, but simple work that others value, even in tech. Don't be too clever in that MVP. Substance over style. Etc etc.

View on HN

Every place I've worked those people get taken advantage of and are left to do the grunt work, boxed in to their jobs

There was a lot more to it, of course. I took that from his book "An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth".

Maybe this particular bit of philosophy wasn't the reason he became a commander on the ISS, but it seemed to work for him. It isn't to say you let people take advantage of you, or that you don't make hard decisions, or that you never attempt to innovate. It is just to say, don't be a minus one. It is sort of like comedy in that you can't decide to be funny and then everyone will think you are funny.

The context is also important, he mostly used this to illustrate how he approached things as a new member of a team learning the ropes, even as the commander. He is thrust into a new environment, and he is the commander of the operation, but he didn't immediately impose his authority, he stacked and organized and learned how things were going before making executive decisions. So the whole -1, 0, +1 thing is as much a leadership style as it is his idea on how to be successful.

I think also the environment of a fighter pilot then astronaut does not tolerate showmanship or overt "I am smart" cleverness. It likes consistent hard work and problem solving that is well thought out. Showmanship gets people killed in space. Endeavoring to be a +1 for any of the very numerous wrong reasons just ends up taking away from the mission.

Anyhow, perhaps that adds some context to the idea.

Just a note that NPS uses a scale with low predictive validity and you should probably tell people to stop using it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_Promoter#Criticism_of_NPS

Interesting. I do like the question from a general 'do you like thing X' perspective, but as critics seem to rightly argue, you should not use it alone.

Another question I like in the same vein, "Would you recommend other people to work here?". I think it is just one of many measures of "engagement" though.

Also, I have to agree with the general sentiment against NPS. I have seen teams forced into UI enhancement death marches because their app got a low NPS. It was plastered on billboards and there was a huge push to get the NPS up. It became a bit of a running joke. That anecdotal experience made me really wary of it in general, even though I like the concept as a general engagement measure.... maybe you shouldn't base management decisions on just that :)

I have worked for multiple large and small companies who thought NPS was a valid metric for customer feedback, and in my experience it has told us little to no information even though management has generally said we have to be at X to be successful.

When I worked for Apple Support the best in breed was a five point scale with a neutral midpoint and multiple questions on different axis, just as the wikipedia article stated, and I felt it was a clear and straightforward method of measuring customer satisfaction and in some cases quality, so that is what I recommend.

NPS I think is really for employee motivation.

Reminds me of Charlie Munger's (vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway) investment philosophy/mantra that "avoiding stupidity is easier than seeking brilliance".

To continue further afield - reminds me of the observation that cigarettes are just as bad for you as all known positive health interventions combined are good for you. So campaigns to eliminate smoking are by far the best "bang for your buck" public health initiative.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com