WEBVTT - Solve by subtracting

0:00:03.440 --> 0:00:08.440
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Before Breakfast, a production of I Heart Radio.

0:00:09.080 --> 0:00:15.000
<v Speaker 1>Good Morning, This is Laura. Welcome to the Before Breakfast podcast.

0:00:16.000 --> 0:00:21.720
<v Speaker 1>Today's tip is to solve by subtracting. In life, our

0:00:21.840 --> 0:00:26.159
<v Speaker 1>bias is often to add, but taking away can be

0:00:26.320 --> 0:00:31.200
<v Speaker 1>just as useful. I recently read a fascinating book by

0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:36.280
<v Speaker 1>Light E. Clots called Subtract The Untapped Science of less.

0:00:37.159 --> 0:00:40.800
<v Speaker 1>Klotz has built his career studying how people approach problems.

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:45.839
<v Speaker 1>In particular, he noticed an interesting phenomenon while building a

0:00:45.960 --> 0:00:49.680
<v Speaker 1>lego bridge with his young son. The two sides they

0:00:49.720 --> 0:00:53.599
<v Speaker 1>had constructed were uneven, so Clots went to grab an

0:00:53.640 --> 0:00:57.640
<v Speaker 1>extra brick for the short side. As he was doing so,

0:00:58.400 --> 0:01:01.120
<v Speaker 1>he saw that his son had taken a brick away

0:01:01.160 --> 0:01:05.320
<v Speaker 1>from the tall side, which of course solved the problem

0:01:05.400 --> 0:01:09.800
<v Speaker 1>just as easily. He wondered why he had automatically thought

0:01:09.920 --> 0:01:13.480
<v Speaker 1>to add a brick. He put the same test to

0:01:13.600 --> 0:01:17.240
<v Speaker 1>various other people and found that the overwhelming human bias

0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:20.600
<v Speaker 1>is to solve the problem by adding a piece rather

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:25.560
<v Speaker 1>than taking one away. This is an interesting bias because

0:01:25.600 --> 0:01:31.119
<v Speaker 1>in many cases subtracting seems like a better solution. Fewer

0:01:31.200 --> 0:01:36.240
<v Speaker 1>materials cost less than more materials. When it comes to

0:01:36.360 --> 0:01:41.200
<v Speaker 1>things that take time, time is an absolutely limited resource.

0:01:42.240 --> 0:01:45.559
<v Speaker 1>When we add things to our schedule, we cut off

0:01:45.600 --> 0:01:50.880
<v Speaker 1>the opportunity to do other things. Clot cites examples in

0:01:50.920 --> 0:01:54.400
<v Speaker 1>his book From the Real World, We're Subtracting wasn't the

0:01:54.480 --> 0:01:57.360
<v Speaker 1>obvious solution, but turned out to be a better one.

0:01:58.440 --> 0:02:01.880
<v Speaker 1>For instance, I always love walking along the Embarcadero whenever

0:02:01.920 --> 0:02:05.640
<v Speaker 1>I visit San Francisco. There used to be a freeway there.

0:02:06.600 --> 0:02:10.040
<v Speaker 1>The city only took down that freeway because of an earthquake.

0:02:10.919 --> 0:02:14.080
<v Speaker 1>With all the traffic and congestion in San Francisco, getting

0:02:14.200 --> 0:02:18.120
<v Speaker 1>rid of a road might seem a bit crazy, and

0:02:18.200 --> 0:02:22.360
<v Speaker 1>yet doing so massively boosted property values and use of

0:02:22.400 --> 0:02:27.680
<v Speaker 1>the San Francisco waterfront. Yes, traffic is bad, put traffic

0:02:28.200 --> 0:02:33.160
<v Speaker 1>is always bad. People figure something out. In any case.

0:02:33.280 --> 0:02:36.440
<v Speaker 1>When you know that the bias is to add rather

0:02:36.480 --> 0:02:40.880
<v Speaker 1>than subtract, you can take steps to counter that bias.

0:02:41.919 --> 0:02:46.520
<v Speaker 1>This has obvious ramifications with new products. Rather than add

0:02:46.600 --> 0:02:49.280
<v Speaker 1>more features, maybe things would work better if you took

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:53.160
<v Speaker 1>some features away and made the ones that remain really awesome.

0:02:54.480 --> 0:02:57.360
<v Speaker 1>When you think about adding something to your schedule, think

0:02:57.480 --> 0:03:01.440
<v Speaker 1>first about what you might take away. Perhaps people are

0:03:01.480 --> 0:03:06.119
<v Speaker 1>missing deadlines with a project. Rather than schedule more check ins,

0:03:06.760 --> 0:03:10.800
<v Speaker 1>maybe you should cancel as many meetings as possible so

0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:14.920
<v Speaker 1>people have time to do their jobs. Maybe instead of

0:03:14.960 --> 0:03:18.120
<v Speaker 1>sending more emails to employees about the various benefits they

0:03:18.120 --> 0:03:21.040
<v Speaker 1>could be using, you could limit this down to one

0:03:21.120 --> 0:03:25.160
<v Speaker 1>email so people have time to use their benefits rather

0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:29.920
<v Speaker 1>than sorting through their inboxes. Rather than making forms longer

0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:34.280
<v Speaker 1>to get more useful information from applicants, make them shorter

0:03:35.200 --> 0:03:39.000
<v Speaker 1>so people can answer a few questions well. That can

0:03:39.040 --> 0:03:44.480
<v Speaker 1>give you useful information without confusing things. I have often

0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:48.080
<v Speaker 1>noticed this with writing. I like to think that I

0:03:48.200 --> 0:03:53.160
<v Speaker 1>already write tight, and yet whatever I have said is

0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:57.920
<v Speaker 1>almost always better after I have subtracted ten to of

0:03:58.000 --> 0:04:02.160
<v Speaker 1>the words. I could keep trying to explain things to

0:04:02.200 --> 0:04:05.480
<v Speaker 1>make them more clear, but they tend to naturally be

0:04:05.560 --> 0:04:12.280
<v Speaker 1>more clear with the needless words omitted. So today, as

0:04:12.320 --> 0:04:16.680
<v Speaker 1>you think about your various choices, look for situations where

0:04:16.680 --> 0:04:20.359
<v Speaker 1>your first thought is what to add. Maybe you do

0:04:20.440 --> 0:04:24.800
<v Speaker 1>need to add something, but maybe you need less of something.

0:04:25.920 --> 0:04:29.720
<v Speaker 1>Try to look at both angles. There is great power

0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:34.279
<v Speaker 1>in subtracting. But even when adding and subtracting are both

0:04:34.440 --> 0:04:40.760
<v Speaker 1>reasonable options. Subtracting might produce a simpler and more economical solution,

0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:47.960
<v Speaker 1>and there's something very satisfying about that. In the meantime,

0:04:48.960 --> 0:04:53.119
<v Speaker 1>this is Laura. Thanks for listening, and here's to making

0:04:53.120 --> 0:05:02.720
<v Speaker 1>the most of our time. M Hey everybody, I'd love

0:05:02.760 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 1>to hear from you. You can send me your tips,

0:05:05.080 --> 0:05:08.760
<v Speaker 1>your questions, or anything else. Just connect with me on Twitter,

0:05:09.120 --> 0:05:13.840
<v Speaker 1>Facebook and Instagram at Before Breakfast Pod. That's b E

0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:18.680
<v Speaker 1>the number four, then Breakfast p o D. You can

0:05:18.680 --> 0:05:22.240
<v Speaker 1>also shoot me an email at Before Breakfast podcast at

0:05:22.240 --> 0:05:25.239
<v Speaker 1>i heeart media dot com that Before Breakfast is spelled

0:05:25.279 --> 0:05:27.920
<v Speaker 1>out with all the letters. Thanks so much, I look

0:05:27.920 --> 0:05:36.279
<v Speaker 1>forward to staying in touch. Before Breakfast is a production

0:05:36.320 --> 0:05:39.720
<v Speaker 1>of I Heart Radio. For more podcasts from my heart Radio,

0:05:40.240 --> 0:05:43.760
<v Speaker 1>visit the i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever

0:05:43.839 --> 0:05:45.159
<v Speaker 1>you listen to your favorite shows.