Prioritization as a Superpower
nbt.substack.com
nbt.substack.com
If this article came from a founder on their experiences with prioritization, I think it would feel more genuine and insightful of what you might be able to take away from it.
I work as a big tech PM and prioritization is my job. I've explored hundreds of ways to do it. Found some good ones, found some bad ones. What I can say is that experience is the only way you become accustomed to the characteristics the author is mentioning with regards to people who are good at prioritization.
The most effective tool I've found? The 80/20 rule or known as Pareto's Principle. That has applied to every single project, program, and initiative I've been apart of to large degrees of success. It's the most flexible and can apply everywhere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Another interesting one depending where you work is the 1% rule. This helps you demonstrate whether certain things benefit everyone, or just a small but loud few.
Can you elaborate on applying 80/20 rule in projects. Do you focus on 20% of the most important deliverables? 20% of timeline (focus on bottlenecks)?
I sometimes wonder if smartphone culture is at least partially to blame for a tendency towards an inability to plan things in advance. Smartphones make it easy for people to constantly change their schedules, make last-minute arrangements, and they also promote the immediate gratification mentality.
That all sounds nice and good in theory, but I think everyone who has worked at a startup knows how difficult that can be in practice, primarily because you have lots of unexpected issues and challenges come up on a day-to-day basis, and at a startup (as opposed to a large, established company) there is rarely spare capacity to deal with those emergent issues.
Every startup I've ever worked at certainly had weekly or biweekly sprint plannings, and monthly status checks, and quarterly planning. That didn't really make it any easier to solve the constant prioritization struggle of the strategic vs. the day-to-day.
How much experience do you have at very early stage startups? From my personal experience, things are often very chaotic prior to product-market fit. It is wasteful to plan too far in advance because there are so many uncertainties. There are too many teams that spend a whole lot of time feeling productive while scheduling and planning, but in reality they aren't actually getting s** done. Not saying this is always the case - it depends on the product/industry/tech, but getting things done without a clear plan is a very advantageous trait for early stage founders.
The list of traits needed for a founder are very similar. Flexible - yeah sure that's me. Imaginative? Humble ? tick tick.
What makes a real founder? Dunno. But i doubt it's a priori qualities of that person. I would like to see a BC fund randomly assign money to citizens. See what realmempircal evidence tells us.
With that out of the way, there's a huge "but".
My personal experience after having worked in a number of different fields, is that many people who consider themselves to be super-prioritizers are basically borderline a***s who "delegate", "know when to say no", and "follow the pareto principle".
When any one of these is used sparingly and in isolation, it can help and make a positive difference. But when all 3 are present at the same time, it's a huge red flag.
It leads to people who readily dump work on others, while systematically refusing to take off other people's load when possible, and half-ass their job, effectively achieving "efficiency" by not doing stuff, secure in the knowledge that someone else will sacrifice their own efficiency to pick up the slack. And all this while feeling good about themselves on how efficient they're being.
And unfortunately, because of silly metrics that tend to favour such people, this creates a vicious cycle, with dysfunctional teams, and inefficiencies becoming externalised all over the place.
For example, you can choose your most necessary goals using SMART++ criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-phased, Ethical, Environmentally sound, Positively stated, etc.). Or you can prioritize weekly tasks, evaluating them by your criteria of choice (Urgency, Importance, Unavoidability, Manageability, Impact, Ethical, social, and ecological responsibility, Financial return, etc.)
Or the author of the article, as an investor, could get help choosing a founding team for funding, evaluating them by the criteria he mentioned: hungry, humble, knowledgeable, and attractive for talent.
Here is the link: https://www.1st-things-1st.com
If you can get it down to the one thing you need to be doing right now, you'll be good. If you choose the wrong priority, then that's feedback for future priority selection.
Do not choose more than one thing. Just choose more frequently the smaller the tasks you need to complete are. Entry level engineering is usually a few things a day, the more senior it becomes one a day to one a week. Once you're in the executive ranks, it becomes one a month/quarter.
The mistake many people make is thinking they need to pick more than one thing because they have so many simultaneous things occurring. This is an incorrect view of time - you can only do one. Pick one. The world's urgency will interrupt you sufficiently that the rest is largely just task urgency update management.
If you struggle to pick something, I've found alltom's tooling great: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/priorities-in-motion/id1577124...
that and a big fat mess.
Ah just skim the article. The first time says that he is a VC. I think one ought to expect that much from VCs. As you can see emy expectations for VC is not very hight.
Now it's mostly Medium.com all over again.
Which means, given time, Substack will go the way of Medium. There is no cost to publishing, and Substack doesn't have a way to kick spammers, influencers and lowest-common denominator content out.
Thanks again!