Don't become more productive. Do this instead.

//// A THREAD (you need to read) ////

Roughly speaking, there are two paradigms of science:

Reductionism and Holism.
Reductionism considers that breaking down any system into its constituent parts is the best way to understand it fully.

In this paradigm, all systems can be fully reasoned only with reference to their elementary parts. The whole is just the sum of the parts.
Holism understands something in reference to the ecosystem it belongs to and the relationships between its constituent parts. To a holist, the whole is more than just the sum of the parts.
While Reductionism doesn't care about the relationships between the interconnected parts within a system, Holism uses those as the core reference for its analysis.

Why does this matter?
Well, applying a reductionist stance to a simple system is enough because you won't miss out too much on critical relationships between its constituent parts. There aren't that many, after all.
Applying a reductionist stance on a complex system, though, is a surefire way of missing the critical elements that provide a complete understanding of what it is, how it works and why it matters.
Holism and Reductionism's dichotomy leads to several fundamentally different perspectives on many phenomena that constitute our reality.
Nowhere near as obvious as in relation to the concept of "PRODUCTIVITY"
See, all humans are complex systems product of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. Our minds and bodies are perfected biological structures adapted to the environment we have evolved in as a species.

The problem?
The speed of transformation of the environment (natural, social, political, technological) has been much faster than the human species' biological evolution.

There's a mismatch between both evolutionary inertias that can't be understated.
This mismatch has to be acknowledged (from a holistic -or systems-thinking-based- perspective) when dealing with the concept of productivity.
The core idea of this thread: trying to become more "productive" by harnessing the power of a new mental model or tool (use Notion, don't use social media, dopamine fasting etc...) is a reductionist approach that doesn't work in the long term
It doesn't address the evolutionary mismatch between your biological nature, and the ecosystem you operate into.

It is a 1-side approach to a complex problem: how to optimize a complex system (You) for maximum productivity.

It is bound to fail in the long term.
The solution? Ditch the concept of productivity, and embrace the concept of "personal performance".

Transform your understanding of yourself.
Think of yourself as a complex system, an interconnected web of biological processes with heavy evolutionary inertia that needs to be optimized in the context of our current data-driven knowledge economy.
Your job is to analyze, dissect, optimize and master that machine from a holistic (systems-thinking-driven) perspective.
Optimizing your performance is therefore the process of dissecting, analyzing, and rebuilding the whole System of You based on the relationships between its constituent parts and the ecosystem you inhabit for maximum output.
While Productivity is about changing processes, Performance is about changing paradigms.
Performance Optimization 101:

1- Change your paradigm (from Productivity to Performance)
2- Identify the levers, pitfalls, dependencies & tradeoffs within "the System of You".
3- Correct the pitfalls.
4- Optimize for the right goals, on the right limits, with the right timing.
Improving about productivity will make you 20% more "productive".

Becoming a peak performer will 10X your "productivity".

Choose wisely.
If you need help implement these concepts, or want to truly & radically transform how you operate in the world, learn how we can help you here:

https://t.co/n3RCR3GX3d
If you found value in this thread, please RT the first tweet. Thanks!

More from Life

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.

You May Also Like

1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.