This text number is 6300 and the estimated reading time is 15 minutes.
Reading enriches people and sharing makes people happy. At the end of the article, a mind map is attached to help you sort out the essence of the context in the text. Welcome to read, you are one step closer to knowledge.
The book shared today is Subtraction.
The author, Lady Klotz, an associate professor at the University of Virginia, proposer and advocate of the principle of "subtraction", his article on "subtraction" appeared on the cover of the internationally renowned academic journal Nature.
From overtime to 996 to "inner volume", why are our lives getting busier and busier?
A study published in the journal Nature found that when people want to change the status quo, we tend to do addition rather than streamline what's in the present. But facts have proved that blindly doing addition is not the optimal solution of life, how to grasp the big and let go of the small, refine the thinking and action paradigm, is the way to improve work efficiency and life happiness.
Therefore, this book not only explores the deep reasons why people like to do addition, but also provides a set of subtractive thinking rules to help us simplify the complex and lighten up in a limited life.
01、See "More"
An author study published in the journal Nature found that when people want to change the status quo, we tend to do addition rather than streamline what's in the present. But facts have proved that blindly doing addition is not the optimal solution of life, how to grasp the big and let go of the small, refine the thinking and action paradigm, is the way to improve work efficiency and life happiness.
1. Recognize the power of diminishing
The author says that "less" is actually a better option. When the author accompanied his son to build blocks, he found that the towers at both ends of the bridge were of different heights, and the bridge could not be erected, so the author turned around and grabbed a block to add to the shorter bridge tower. But when he turned around, he found his 3-year-old son tearing down a block from a taller tower.
Faced with different heights of building blocks and towers, the author's first thought was to increase the height of the low tower, and after seeing his son's approach, he realized that his idea was wrong. To build a smooth bridge, it is faster and more efficient to lower the height of the higher towers.
So the author said, will this be a difference, will it be a difference between children and adults? So he took this set of half-built toys and went to the class to find a lot of students to build, and the author slowly observed the behavior of these people. He gradually discovered that the vast majority of people increased one piece, and only a very small number of people lost one piece.
The author said that building blocks are one thing, let's try another material. He took a movement and ran to the conservatory students and asked them to revise the movement to see how to make the song better. The conclusion is that the vast majority of people increase notes, and a small number of people decrease notes. The authors tested it in many ways, and the results showed that the number of people who thought of increasing something was 3 times the number of people who thought of reducing something.
For example, "Raster Experiments". On a board, there are many different sizes of grids, each side of the grid to make a pattern, the experimenter asked: "How to make the two sides of the pattern symmetrical?" "The way to make the graphic symmetrical is to fill in the missing parts, or to remove the excess parts, both of which can achieve symmetry."
But in reality, only 20% of people chose to reduce the lattice to achieve symmetry. In fact, the title does not specify what kind of graphic it should be, as long as the two sides are symmetrical, but only 20% of people think of reducing the grid, and 80% of people still choose to increase the grid.
So what is the likelihood that people will choose this way? The author makes a prediction of possibility, saying: "We choose addition, perhaps because we prefer what we make ourselves, which is called the 'IKEA effect'." ”
Or maybe it's because cutting something out means acknowledging that what was added before is sunk costs. "If you're going to throw away your stuff at home, it's going to be hard. Because it means you're buying the wrong thing, and admitting that you bought the wrong thing is a very bad thing.
"Maybe it's because we believe that if something exists, there must be a reason for it; maybe it's because loss is more disturbing than gain." Of course, abandoning false theories, dismantling an obstructive highway, and desegregation have nothing to lose, but it turns out that it is easy to think of reduction as a loss.
For whatever reason, if we choose addition between addition and subtraction, then this "interesting phenomenon" is not necessarily a problem; but if we do not consider subtraction at all, it means that we lack a comprehensive understanding of the possibilities and are bound to cause errors and omissions. So how can we increase the likelihood that we will do subtraction in our lives? The author gives three pieces of advice:
First, "think deeper."
Second, "consciously think of subtraction."
Third, "invest more mental bandwidth in change."
What is mental bandwidth? The Japanese once did a funny show. It is said that when a person is on the phone, you stuff anything in his hand, and he will follow. For example, someone first brings a cup of coffee to a person, after a while sees that he is still on the phone, and then leads a dog to his hand, he answers, after answering he continues to call, and then suddenly finds out how there is a dog in his hand? The capacity of this mind is called "mental bandwidth."
When we invest more mental bandwidth in change, it means that we are not making decisions based on inertia."
2, do addition is instinctive
Humans, like animals, have a nature to show their abilities. There is a bird called the gardener bird. During courtship, the male gardener bird will build a particularly exaggerated, particularly beautiful house, if there is a row of male birds, will build a row of houses, all in one place, and then the female bird will come to see, house by house to visit. After the visit, the female bird sees which house is the best, and she mates with the male bird. This is how they court.
After the male and female have mated, none of the birds will live in the house. It means that the male gardener bird built such a luxurious house, they do not live, this is just for the female bird to see, after reading the two of them married, and then moved to the female bird's simple nest to live, and the luxurious nest does not live at all, this is the nature.
Second, "the instinct to acquire items". In primitive society, people's living conditions are very poor, and everyone is afraid of not having anything to eat, so they will choose to hoard everything and try to put it at home. This is the primitive instinct of human beings, the instinct to obtain objects.
Finally, the instinct to perceive relative quantities. A little kid hasn't learned any addition, but you give him two piles of sugar and he'll be able to know which one is more and which is less, and that's called the instinct to feel (relatively) quantities. And people's perceptions of relative quantities and absolute numbers are completely different.
For example, I give you 80 jelly beans, and then I take another 30. Or I'll give you 20 jelly beans first and then 30 again. Which option do you choose? Most people will choose the second one. Although the answer to both schemes is 50, from a scientific point of view, let us know that relative quantities and absolute quantities do not feel the same.
In human history, addition has defined civilization. For example, the Great Wall of China, the pyramids of Egypt, and so on, these things are constantly increasing. So the increase brings us the foundation of civilization, and makes us feel that only by adding things can we show the power of civilization. So it also leads to an increase in the dependence of human nature and a decrease in neglect.
For example, there is a psychological experiment. The author found a group of people, divided them into two groups, and then gave each group $40 each. Then, the first group took $40 to buy something casually, and after buying it, everyone chatted to see how the day went. The other group, also $40 per person, can spend money to dispense with some work.
That is, the person in the first group has to spend money to buy things, but he has to complete some tasks and work at the same time, while the people in the second group do not buy things but can refuse to do those jobs.
The two groups spent the $40 in completely different ways, and after the end, the author asked which group was more satisfied with the day. The authors conducted many experiments and found that the group that spent money to reduce things was in a better mood, while the group that spent money on things was not in a better mood. So we spend money shopping, and after buying a lot of things, we will feel blocked, and ask ourselves, "How did you buy so many things, but you can't control it when you buy it." Therefore, we have proved through psychological experiments that reducing things is the way to be happier.
02、 Share "less"
The author says that the practice of a person in this lifetime is a process of subtraction. Subtractive thinking does not require us to simply get rid of redundant information, but teaches us to see the truth in our daily lives, see more thoroughly, and live more easily. So what can help us do more subtraction?
1. Reversal of thinking
"I didn't have time to write a concise letter, so I had to write a long letter to you." This phrase is often considered a quote by Mark Twain. Many people would rather write more than less because they understand that concise text takes longer.
The philosopher and physician John Locke once said, "To be honest, I'm lazy and busy right now, so I don't want to do anything to streamline." Locke's words are instructive to those who question their efforts. Whether it's writing articles or building, whether it's ideas or real things, we will find that the simplest and most practical way is often to go with the flow. What does that mean?
First, the authors propose a "reduction after satisfaction is achieved." This means that our reduction cannot be based on indifference.
For example, bicycles. A standard pedal bike has fewer parts than a bike with auxiliary wheels, but for a novice, riding a standard bike is not balanced. This is "less" before satisfaction is achieved, and according to John Locke, it can be called "lazy province".
For novices, a bike with pedals and auxiliary wheels is enough, as novices can stabilize the bike without falling. But McFarland's new bike, the balance bike, isn't just good enough to help newbies learn to ride a "bike" more effectively.
This "less" after going beyond good enough makes us very interested, because this is the "less" after satisfaction is achieved.
For example, to make the buttons of the remote control simpler, the result is less than half of the function, that is definitely not OK. We have to make sure that the basic functions can be implemented, and then make the remote control simpler, which is an effective reduction. And this reduction is called "the reduction after satisfaction is achieved." You first have to achieve basic satisfaction, and on that basis we think about how to change and how to reduce.
The author proposes a ratio called "information ink ratio". Maximizing the information ink ratio means that the shorter the content we convey, the better, and it is best to use the fewest words to explain this matter clearly, which is a simplified method.
Second, "reduce to the point of arousing joy." To what extent does life need to be reduced? Reduce until joy is aroused. For example, the magic of life tidying up that is very popular in Japan is to ignite our inner happiness by tidying up life, and then generate flow.
Third, we can convert subtraction. Because the subtractive words all have a "negative valence", that is, as long as the subtractive word appears, we feel uncomfortable in our hearts. The intrinsic attraction of an event, object, or thought to a person is called "positive valence"; or the sense of disgust brought to people, this is called "negative valence".
In chemistry, valence is now an established concept in psychology and is very helpful for the construction of psychology. "We want to make something more acceptable, and we can transform its psychological valence into what everyone doesn't like."
When we go to a 4S store to buy a car, why do the people who sell the car want us to test drive it? Because once you try it, you feel like the car is yours. Once you feel that the car is yours, you want to have it, and then bargain with the sales, just to make a deal. This is the psychology of loss aversion, which comes from the concept of valence. For what is lost, what is reduced, our psychological valence is to be rejected.
2. Subtraction list
Subtraction can change the system. This is viewed from the perspective of systems theory and complex systems. For example, when Leo Robinson refused to unload the South African cargo, he had no idea how much the impact of the incident was. No one can calculate that this is the starting point of the collapse of the racial system thousands of miles away.
But racism is a system, and we don't know where that system is going to collapse, so when dockworkers react to that, a chain reaction comes, causing the whole system of racial discrimination to collapse. So, to see a system, we need to see the details of it.
Kurt Lewin inspired two great people, one was the famous psychologist Festinger, we often see the "Fistinger Law", Feistinger was Kurt Lewin's student, and the other was Daniel Kahnemann. Both men have repeatedly cited Kurt Lewin's scholarly findings. Lewin once said, "Removing the forces within the system that hinder progress is the most effective way to change the system." "So to change a system, we have a good class of methods, a bad class of methods.
What is a good way to do it? Removing the obstacles of progressive forces is a good way to do that, because the way you use is to reduce. The bad way is to increase, to change the system by adding rules and methods.
For example, in order to encourage innovation, a company will continue to increase KPIs (key performance indicators), and then add a rule to each person: how much of the innovative product you make must be. Many companies are accustomed to using increasing metrics to determine employee behavior, and eventually employees collapse.
So a good approach is, can we increase the behavior of innovation by reducing constraints? For example, the process of reducing a reimbursement, an approval process, and a jury process. In our past systems, people did not believe in complex systems, but more in mechanical control, leading us to a misconception: the tighter the control, the more stable the system will be.
If you want to use subtraction systematically, you have to learn to embrace complexity and pursue essence. The authors say: "When encountering complex systems, we should try to avoid overloading working memory. A list of thousands of items may be useful in legal proceedings. But if we both memorize and use this information, it becomes a full-size map, large enough to cover the sun. In order to change the system, we need to find the essence of the system, which means that some details need to be removed.
So the question is: what to leave and what to delete? If the more complex the system, the more difficult it is to do subtraction, then the greater the reward after subtraction. How to reduce unnecessary details reflects the way and focus of our intervention system. The so-called "essence of things" is to see if you can grasp the most core things in a complex system.
For example, the author's cousin is the director of the emergency room. Complex human systems are often confronted. Whether it's a toddler who is suffocating, a diabetic with inadequate insulin secretion, or a grandmother with hip pain, in Kelly's eyes, every new patient case is unique and unpredictable.
The author asked her cousin how she calmly handled so many things in the emergency room. The cousin replied that there were only three things. Three things can solve the problem of complex systems.
First, called "Do you need to implement life-saving intervention on the patient immediately", that is, you have to judge whether this person is dead without rescue, which is the first one. Second, "how many medical resources the patient needs to occupy", that is, how many medical resources you need to call up if you want to rescue the patient. Third, "what are the vital signs of the patient?" In such a chaotic environment, the people in charge of allocating resources in the emergency department consider these three things, and from these three things, every night can be smoothly passed.
When we are faced with a complex system, if we think of every detail, we will certainly not be able to take care of it, so we must grasp the most important part.
Second, less is more.
For example, the stacking of bricks is very technical, like chess and cards, and seems to be a very old game. But in fact, The Folding Originated in the Mid-1980s, when Leslie Scott introduced it to the UK from Ghana and then spread around the world. Later, Leslie Scott also became the inventor of a series of toys. Yes, in the history of developing toys, the idea of eliminating bricks began almost at the time of the development of Tetris.
When playing stacking, the blocks are first built into a solid tower of blocks, with three blocks per layer, perpendicular to the three blocks on the next floor. Each time the player takes turns pulling out a block and then placing it on top of the building block tower. As the tower gets taller and taller, the tower becomes more and more unstable, making it difficult for players to complete their missions without bringing the tower down. In stacked brick games, the player who knocks down the tower loses, while others feel like they are the winners.
Stacking and Lego are just the opposite. Lego is the more you play, the more fragments in the home, because you need to keep buying, keep buying, and there are a lot of LEGO toys in the house. But when you put together a complete model, you won't play anymore, because that's what Lego has to offer. Lego is a game of doing addition. And Stacked Music can play over and over again, and you can play for many years, and you don't have to buy new ones, because it's a game that keeps decreasing. These are two completely different game ideas.
That is, subtracting first increases the effect of the change. "Not just toys, project management professional textbooks are also a reminder to students and professors. If a series of changes occur and the early results become later conditions, the early changes tend to be more influential and less costly. "Stacking is a game that reduces, but the more you play, the more exciting it becomes, and the more you play, the more thrilling it becomes. Why? Because every change you make is a prerequisite for the next change, which is a change in a geometric progression.
So in an organization, if we can learn to do subtraction, its utility is constantly multiplying, not decreasing. If you change the organization in an increasing way, for every additional metric, its marginal benefit decreases, which is a completely different approach. Therefore, when you find the essence of the system you want to change, you can try to subtract a little and then subtract a little like you would play stacking, so that less is highlighted and the qualitative change is achieved.
Finally, reuse what is deleted.
For example, donuts. Donuts were first invented as fried pancakes. In 1847 there was a boy named Hansen Gregory. The teenager's mother's cooking skills are not very good, the fried oil cake in the middle is always fried, the teenager asked the mother, why the oil cake can not be fried in the middle? Mom said that there were too many noodles in the middle, so it couldn't be fried. So he thought, wouldn't it be better if I pulled out the dough in the middle? So he dug a hole in the middle of the oil cake, and after pulling it out, the oil cake was easily fried, turned into a donut, and became the most popular food at that time. This is a case of "less is more".
Of course, the part that is pulled out is not wasted, and it becomes a sweet ball after blowing it up again. So you find that in the donut shop, there are both doughnut sellers and doughnut balls, which do not cause waste, and everyone's satisfaction has increased.
Thus, the authors conclude that there are four steps to an effective subtraction list. First, delete details before improving the system, such as when trying to make emergency departments; second, do subtraction first, just like playing stacking, reduce a little, and then reduce a little; third, insist on making "less" visible, achieve a qualitative leap, so that less parts can be found by people, bring benefits; finally, reuse deleted content, like a doughnut hole. What is reduced should not be wasted, which is the basic steps and methods of using subtraction to change the system.