Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goals vs. Systems (2013)

blog.dilbert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#21

Post by tonyarkles »

karimdag wrote: post #4

I’ve thought (and experimented) about this for a while and here’s what I came up with: * Goals are better for the short-term (we’re talking days and weeks). * Systems (naturally) are better for the long-term (months and years). * The best way to system-ize something is to make it a habit. * A system without an objective is useless and inefficient. * Which to use ? It depends on your personality AND the task at hand.…

System: - recurring tasks to ensure that you’re stocked on non-sugary snacks and meals

The system goal is to make the good choice the easy choice.

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#22

Post by paulpauper »

My writing for the Wall Street Journal, along with my public practice on this blog, attracted the attention of book publishers, and that attention turned into a book deal. And the book deal generated speaking requests that are embarrassingly lucrative. So the payday for blogging eventually arrived, but I didn’t know in advance what path it would take. My blogging has kicked up dozens of business opportunities over the past years, so it could have taken any direction.

I wonder if a cartoon had anything to do with that

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#23

Post by deltron3030 »

karimdag wrote: post #4

I’ve thought (and experimented) about this for a while and here’s what I came up with: * Goals are better for the short-term (we’re talking days and weeks). * Systems (naturally) are better for the long-term (months and years). * The best way to system-ize something is to make it a habit. * A system without an objective is useless and inefficient. * Which to use ? It depends on your personality AND the task at hand.…

Objectives are projections of a desired state at a certain moment in time imo. Goals are the actual state at that moment in time. Stop consuming sugar wouldn't be a goal, but goal oriented objective behavior (because you can control/measure you sugar intake, materializing your objective this way). A goal would be a certain amount of lost weight.

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#24

Post by swasheck »

codingdave wrote: post #20

Like everything, a balance is needed. Systems without goals are how we end up with enterprise bureaucracy and resistance to change.

I think that it's a bit more nuanced than that. I think that we end up with bureaucracy because goals are not aligned across silos (divisions, time, etc.) and the systems that are implemented to achieve those goals overlap and create redundancies and inefficiencies.

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#26

Post by karimdag »

deltron3030 wrote: post #23
karimdag wrote: post #4

I’ve thought (and experimented) about this for a while and here’s what I came up with: * Goals are better for the short-term (we’re talking days and weeks). * Systems (naturally) are better for the long-term (months and years). * The best way to system-ize something is to make it a habit. * A system without an objective is useless and inefficient. * Which to use ? It depends on your personality AND the task at hand.…

Objectives are projections of a desired state at a certain moment in time imo. Goals are the actual state at that moment in time. Stop consuming sugar wouldn't be a goal, but goal oriented objective behavior (because you can control/measure you sugar intake, materializing your objective this way). A goal would be a certain amount of lost weight.

The example I gave wasn’t a good one. I suggest something else: think of goals as a “module”, it has a function that servers the main objective.

This idea of modules is also found in Dr Duckworth’s book: Grit.

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#28

Post by deltron3030 »

karimdag wrote: post #26
deltron3030 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Objectives are projections of a desired state at a certain moment in time imo. Goals are the actual state at that moment in time. Stop consuming sugar wouldn't be a goal, but goal oriented objective behavior (because you can control/measure you sugar intake, materializing your objective this way). A goal would be a certain amount of lost weight.

The example I gave wasn’t a good one. I suggest something else: think of goals as a “module”, it has a function that servers the main objective. This idea of modules is also found in Dr Duckworth’s book: Grit.

The way I see it, goals are the actual thing while objectives are diffuse imaginations of something, or the zoomed out perspective. To get a clear picture of something, you have to zoom in from the diffuse one first. You define your goals after zooming in, because then it's clear what's reachable.

A hunter might have the objective to hunt down prey to satisfy his hunger. But at the time he's leaving for hunting he doesn't know what's exactly out there, he will define goals when he has gained a clear picture of the actual environment. That's when he will decide what to hunt and how.

He could decide to abandon his home and become a nomad, following the prey and have it always visible, and satisfy his main objective (hunting to eat) this way. Is this what you mean with module?

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#29

Post by meesterdude »

RayVR wrote: post #25

The whole idea of ego depletion is controversial and according to this meta-analysis, probably does not exist. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bjso.12236

controversial doesn't mean wrong. I've experienced it first-hand and taking steps to manage it has been very helpful. So, maybe what's actually going on will become clarified - maybe it's not ego depletion but some other system interplay; but that something is going on at all should be obvious at this point.

Re: Goals vs. Systems (2013)

#30

Post by natalyarostova »

RayVR wrote: post #25

The whole idea of ego depletion is controversial and according to this meta-analysis, probably does not exist. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/bjso.12236

I haven't read the meta-analysis you linked, but based on my prior reading of this topic, I'd suggest it's more correct to say "It probably has not been measured." Whereas it could still exist, but just elude attempts to measure. I also realize you can say this about anything, but ego depletion is one of those topics where it may seem very likely to be true based on our own experience as living humans, but where measuring its effect across a set of humans is incredibly challenging.
Post reply on HN