Pages

Wednesday, September 25, 2024

Timescales

Humans are notoriously bad at predicting timescales—really bad. Think about it: how often have you started a task thinking it would take just an hour, only to find yourself working on it late into the night? Why do new projects, especially in software, almost always take longer than we anticipate? And remember those bold predictions from the 19th century? By now, we were supposed to be zipping around in flying cars.

These are just a few examples of a broader phenomenon I’ve been reflecting on lately: we consistently misjudge how long things will take.

One key reason for our poor time estimation is optimism bias. We tend to overestimate our efficiency and underestimate potential challenges, assuming things will go smoothly. This sets us up for unrealistic expectations. On a personal level, we often fail to consider distractions or unforeseen complexities. In larger, more complex projects like software development or infrastructure construction, we don’t account for technical setbacks, bureaucratic delays, or miscommunication among stakeholders. 

Optimism bias is a deeply ingrained psychological tendency. It stems from our hope that we can accomplish more in less time than is realistically possible. This bias isn’t just an individual trait—it affects collective decision-making as well.

Our inability to accurately predict timelines has far-reaching consequences. When governments, organizations, or industries miscalculate the duration of complex projects or reforms, the fallout can be severe. Resources get wasted, public frustration builds, and trust in institutions erodes. Infrastructure projects that drag on, often with budget overruns, disrupt communities and lead to economic inefficiencies. Similarly, underestimating the time required for social or political reforms can create disillusionment. Citizens expect rapid change but are often met with slow, incremental progress. This disconnect between expectation and reality can foster cynicism and weaken trust in leadership. It might even contribute to political instability, as people become frustrated with what they perceive as broken promises. In fact, I believe this growing impatience is one reason for the rising popularity of right-wing politics in many Western democracies. People are turning to alternatives that promise quicker, more decisive action.

Yet, some people seem to navigate these complexities more effectively. They appear to defy the unpredictability of timelines and achieve remarkable success. But are they really breaking the mold? I don’t think so. Instead, I believe these individuals are better at understanding the context in which they operate—and crucially, the timescales involved in their decisions. Consider an example: Let’s say you’re convinced that solar power is the future of energy. That’s a valid belief, but the more important question is: over what timescale? Widespread adoption of solar energy could take decades. If you ignore that reality, your belief remains just that—a belief. Worse, it’s not actionable in the present. And unless you’re working in long-term government policy, the present—and the near future—is what matters most for decision-making. Thirty years from now, you might have the satisfaction of saying, “I told you so,” but by then, you may have missed other opportunities because you misunderstood the timeline of your conviction.

Ultimately, success isn’t just about having the right ideas; it’s about understanding when those ideas, and the external factors needed to enable it, will play out, and aligning your decisions with that understanding. This, I start to believe, is the real magic sauce behind being able to make real progress and having real impact.

No comments:

Post a Comment