Hacker News Reader

Comment by danieltillett | Hacker News Reader

99% of the perfectionists I have had the misfortune to work with are just slow or out of their depth and are using the term as an emotional crutch. How much nicer it is to tell yourself that you are a perfectionist than you are just not very good at whatever you are doing.

The people that turn out near perfect work are usually the fastest and just get things done. It is a pity they are so rare.

View on HN

99% of people who rant against perfectionism don't understand how wholly perfectionism takes over your thought process and that people who suffer from perfectionism are not characterized by "perfect" finished products, or even necessarily describing themselves as such. Rather, it can be a crippling subconscious mindset that inhibits productivity, creativity, and learning.

In other words, the "causes" you identify in your first sentence are actually the consequences of the affliction.

It of course is always difficult to separate cause from effect. It can be difficult to know if perfectionism is driving poor performance or if perfectionism is an emotional crutch to cover for poor performance, but based on my personal experience the crutch hypothesis is the most parsimonious.

I say that if you really were perfectionist you would deliver. If it's not delivered you can't really call it perfect.

That's a fine opinion, but it's ignorant of the entire body of CBT research.

And inasmuch as you merely disagree with it because you think it's the wrong term, well, that's even shakier ground, because the formal definition of language follows from its real-world usage.

That's funny, most of the people I've worked with don't appreciate the value of slow, methodical, thorough work. They lack the ability to predict failure scenarios and predict how small changes will cascade in a system and cause undesired behavior. Therefore the time taken seems wasted to them when in fact they frequently don't understand.

There's room for both types of people in the world, but only one should call themselves an engineer.

Funny, I feel that I'm able to do this, to methodically work through a problem, addressing/exploring all relevant angles, mapping it out in it's entirety as much as possible. To identify potential risk and opportunity.

But I would call this: just my fucking job. Not perfectionism. But I realise also: I'm wrong. Tons of people are unable to do this and call this ability perfectionism, as if it's something bad.

You truly are a saint among men then :)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with slow, methodical and thorough work when the task calls for it. The problem is most self-described perfectionists are neither able to identify when it is needed, nor provide the corresponding quality when required.

Those that know do, those that don’t perfect.

> How much nicer it is to tell yourself that you are a perfectionist than you are just not very good at whatever you are doing.

By that logic, Steve Jobs should have never been good at what he was doing...

I'm sorry, but this notion of yours is kinda insulting to all the perfectionists that had the misfortune of living in a world that doesn't appreciate them.

While it is debatable if Steve Jobs was a perfectionist, even if he were all it would mean is he is one of the 1%.

It is more of a rant caused by me having to wait for the perfectionists to finish their third rate work so I can get on with mine :)

I'm not even sure Steve Jobs claimed to be a perfectionist. "Doing great work" might be more how he would have phrased it, as well as iterating on it.

It is also very different to have a high bar for your self vs for other people. Most people that would self-label as 'perfectionist' are referencing their own behavior, even if it happens to be masking procrastination or indecision. However, I find that this character trait is almost orthogonal to having high standards for others' work, which can instead be code for arrogance or impatience.

And 99% of the agile scrummasters are just selfishly barking up the chain and their koolaid-drinking devotees use the "methodology" to justify shipping barely funcrional shit all the while disguising patches and bug fixes as "incremental value add".

But in all seriousness, I feel like it's a false dichotomy. You can be practical and still demand thoughtfulness and quality. It really kills me when people come to the conclusion that they're mutually exclusive.

Of course - that is why those that turn out great work tend to be fast and just get things done.

If you have skill and understanding of your goals you know exactly how much effort is required for each task and you can balance the competing priorities well.

Producing perfect work has nothing to do with perfectionism.

That is certainly true.

I've noticed that people in many fields who are capable of fast, near perfect work often have had the opportunity to spend lots of time doing the same activities with the slow, methodical mind of a perfectionist. Some of them continue to do this throughout their careers, in the long stretches between the performance of fast, near perfect work.

I think it's a shame that we don't encourage something closer to that balance with professional software development.

> The people that turn out near perfect work are usually the fastest

The fastest results can be half cooked, when reduced time comes at the cost of shortcuts and trade offs taken. It's all the matter of balance.

I have definitely noticed that before, though I'm not sure that I'd prescribe the percentage as 99%. I have definitely seem some relatively poor things defended as "perfectionism".

They might be perfectionist otherwise they would probably have been fired long ago?

I agree with this 'emotional crutch' sentiment.

Most of all, it seems that 'perfectionists' don't see that it is actually a derogatory term.

It means: you can't distinguish between what's important and what's unimportant, so you loose yourself in unimportant details and waste time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com