The Cost of Everything

Our concentration is a finite resource. I often compare it to a reservoir that provides “fuel” throughout the workday and that must necessarily be recharged through collateral activities. It goes without saying that it is up to us to choose how to distribute our energy during the day and how to divide it among different tasks. After all, every activity requires a certain amount of energy to be completed. So far, so clear—but what happens if we use our concentration trying to carry out several activities at the same time? Staying with the engine metaphor, the effect will be that we cover little ground for each activity we are engaged in, and the result will be unsatisfactory and, in the worst case, frustrating.

The Cost of Not Choosing

Allocating resources to carry out multiple activities simultaneously in an undisciplined way contributes to losing sight of the final objective at the management level and further disorients team members. On this point, I’d like to recall that anecdote about a manager who, to optimize the nine months of pregnancy required to have a baby, would employ nine women to succeed in just one month. Another example, borrowed from computer science, is Amdahl’s Law applied to parallelism. In this case, a processor must execute a task, and one tries to make execution faster by increasing the number of processors. The law shows us that the relationship between the number of resources and execution time is not linear, because there are hidden “costs” due to the management of parallelization itself. And this is exactly what happens in many companies: when they realize projects are delayed, they increase resources while keeping management unchanged. Hoping to improve the process, they will eventually realize that much of the energy is wasted and the goal is still missed.

The Essential Model

The path to success in achieving the final goal is the pursuit of the essential. An intense journey that leads to choosing the vital objective on which to focus energy and the most effective way to reach it, avoiding (and not bypassing) obstacles.

Thinking

In management without clear objectives, in the total absence of choice, the main concern of management will be “we must do.” Yes, but what? Most likely the answer will be “Everything!” Everything, because everything is equally important. And sooner or later, one reaches the dreadful doubt: “How will we manage to finish everything on time?” The shift in thinking must lead to making a clear choice: “We choose what to do.” Considering the “scarcity” of energy, it is necessary to understand what is truly vital, acknowledging that the tool for operating is compromise.

Doing

Not choosing to focus energy leads to pursuing harmful practices. One of these is that when urgent requests arise, the immediate reaction is to incorporate more tasks, worsening already difficult management. One tends to say “Yes” to everyone without truly thinking about the costs and potential damages this could cause. The team will navigate by sight, tackling problems as they come without proper preparation. In this case, the shift in vision means taking a pause to discern what really matters, learning to say “No” except to essential things, and removing obstacles before beginning a path to make the journey smoother.

Achieving

Trying to have everything, immediately, and done well is one of the greatest managerial utopias. And yet, there are still cases where, even at the cost of the suffering it causes, one prefers to aim for too much—or worse, for everything. This type of management will soon generate chaos and the sensation of having lost control. From this will come insecurities and further doubts. Managers and teams will feel overwhelmed and exhausted. Embracing the essential allows for making the choice that results in well-done work. The team will be satisfied with having achieved the objective thanks to the full control maintained by management. The path to the finish line will thus be an experience as rewarding as it is exciting.