Getting to 'No'

Re:Getting to 'No' by apinstein on Friday March 23, 2012 @11:35AM (#3745584)

This is one of my all-time favorite anti-patterns. Whether it's Linus's "rejecting kernel patches is one of the important things I do" or Michael Porter's "strategy is about the things you choose not to do" or Miles Davis' "jazz is about the notes you leave out", no is an often overlooked but extremely powerful tool. quotes paraphrased

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Getting to 'No' by crusso on Friday March 23, 2012 @03:07PM (#3746627)

Besides the word "no", the concept in this article is completely different.

Jobs and Linus were talking about being discriminating in the things they choose to do for the sake of the things themselves.

The article this thread is based upon is about building trust from potential clients by being honest with them and helping them to solve their problems altruistically rather than trying to line your pockets by taking on work that you're not qualified to do well. This is more of a real-life use of karma.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Getting to 'No' by apinstein on Friday March 23, 2012 @05:21PM (#3747370)

I disagree completely. The article is one example of the "sometimes not doing something is better than doing it" anti-pattern, it just is in the sales category.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Getting to 'No' by crusso on Friday March 23, 2012 @09:26PM (#3748134)

Sure, at a certain level of abstraction, everything is related to everything. The situations in which you would use the design methodology of simplification really has nothing to do with the reason the original author of this article is recommending not taking on some client work.

On top of all of this, why do you use the term "anti-pattern"?

I don't think that word means what you think it means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-pattern

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Getting to 'No' by apinstein on Friday March 23, 2012 @10:25PM (#3748265)

I still disagree :)

Who said anything about simplification? I think "the design methodology of simplification" is a) not what the article is about IMO, and b) orthogonal to the idea of the power of not trying to do everything that crosses your desk.

The anti-pattern is that in many circles it's essentially a best practice to do everything. Sales guys sell everything, even if it's not in the wheelhouse of the company. Software guys add features that they should probably have the courage to say no to. Musicians over-do their music (ie trying to show off). So that's the anti-pattern; people realize that sometimes saying no is better than the alleged best practice of always finding a way to say yes.

I will admit I certainly could've worded things better, but I was writing from my phone and that tends to decrease my willingness to craft better comments.

That said, the book "Getting to Yes" which is the inspiration for the article's title isn't at all about always saying yes. It's about principled negotiation. It is an amazing book; there's a reason it's standard fare in the MBA world. I would argue that someone practicing principled negotiation would say no in the situation of the article as well; in that sense the articles title is kinda just a cheesy headline (but still nice, it made me click on it).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Getting to 'No' by ScottBurson on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:03PM (#3746077)

> Michael Porter's "strategy is about the things you choose not to do"

Steve Jobs went on at some length about this as well.

I recall reading that he said to the CEO of Nike something like "You make a lot of good products, and a lot of crap. Get rid of the crap."

[ Parent | on HN ]