Summary

The author discusses the trade-offs between accepting occasional minor inconveniences for greater long-term benefits, using the example of a cafe with an open skylight that occasionally leads to furniture being moved due to rain.

Abstract

The author reflects on a visit to a favorite cafe where furniture had been moved due to rain entering through a gap in the skylight, which also serves as a natural watering system for a wall of plants. The cafe's design choice to have an open skylight, despite the occasional inconvenience of rain damage, is contrasted with the alternative of having a conventional roof, which would eliminate such issues but also the benefits of natural light, ventilation, and the plant wall. The author draws a parallel to their own experience with releasing a business podcast on Thursdays instead of the optimal day, Tuesday, due to personal scheduling constraints, arguing that the benefits of their choice outweigh the minimal drawbacks. The article suggests that overcoming the human negativity bias to accept 'sub-optimal' situations can lead to overall better outcomes.

Opinions

The author believes that the benefits of the cafe's open skylight, such as a plant wall and natural ventilation, outweigh the occasional inconvenience of furniture having to be moved due to rain.
It is implied that human negativity bias often leads us to focus on potential negative outcomes rather than appreciating the positive aspects of a situation.
The author suggests that making decisions based solely on avoiding negative consequences can result in missing out on significant benefits.
The author values their creative work time on Mondays and Tuesdays more than the potential increase in podcast listenership that might come from releasing episodes on the optimal day, Tuesday.
The article posits that accepting 'sub-optimal' situations can be infinitely better than not engaging in an activity at all, as exemplified by the author's decision to release their podcast on Thursdays.
The author encourages readers to consider their own 'sub-optimal' activities that are still preferable to not doing them, indicating a belief in the importance of balance and prioritization in decision-making.

“Sometimes” shouldn’t be “never”

I went into my favorite cafe the other day, and some of the furniture was out of place.

It was pretty obvious what the problem was.

It had rained REALLY HARD.

That back wall you see has plants growing on it, all the way up to the skylight above. Where that skylight would meet the wall, there’s a big gap. When it rains, the rain just comes in through the gap, effectively watering the plants.

If it rains REALLY HARD, sometimes the rain gets all over the furniture, too.

So, they move the furniture.

When they designed this place, they could have just had a regular roof on it. That means that they would never have to worry about their furniture getting wet.

But, in making that decision, they would also never have the other benefits of the open roof.

They would never have the beautiful wall of plants. Or, if they did, they would have to water it by hand.

They would never have a cool breeze go through the cafe, as all of the warm air escaped through the gap in the skylight. Instead, they would need air conditioning.

It’s not that it never rains REALLY HARD where this cafe is. It in fact rains that hard sometimes.

When it does, it’s kind of not convenient for awhile. It’s sub-optimal. They have to move furniture around, and clean things, and it’s a minor inconvenience.

Some people would think about those consequences, and decide that they don’t want a gap in their skylight. They’d rather not have the plant wall, and they’d rather spend the money on air conditioning than to sometimes deal with this minor inconvenience.

Our dumb human brains have a negativity bias. Negative consequences register to us mentally at a much higher rate than do positive benefits.

It’s all our ancestors’ faults. If they heard some rustling in the bushes, it cost them little to flee frantically when was just the wind. It cost them their life if they stayed, and it turned out it was a hungry lion.

The people who are running this cafe don’t run the risk of being eaten by lions. They run the risk that sometimes, they have to move the furniture. Some people would choose to never deal with that, so they would just not have the open skylight. They’d miss out on a lot of other benefits.

The best day of the week to release a business podcast is Tuesday mornings. People have had Monday to get up to speed on their week, and they’re ready for a little info-nourishment to get them motivated.

I can’t release my podcast on Tuesday mornings. Rather, if I did, I would have to compromise other important parts of my business. Mondays and Tuesdays are prime creative work time for me.

So, I release my podcast on Thursdays. I get Wednesday to get everything lined up then it goes live on Thursday mornings.

It’s sub-optimal. Sometimes, a potential listener probably misses out on my podcast because it’s not released on a Tuesday morning. Tuesday morning would be a better time to release new episodes.

But it’s INFINITELY better than not doing a podcast.

Additionally, the consequences I suffer for not releasing my podcast on Tuesdays are probably minimal. Maybe it’s a couple percentage points fewer listens. I can live with that, because having Mondays and Tuesdays free to do my best thinking is a benefit that far outweighs those consequences. I’ve overcome my dumb-brain-negativity-bias to see that just because sometimes I miss out on a listener doesn’t mean I should never release my podcast.

So, my podcast episodes are released on Thursdays. That’s sub-optimal, but it’s infinitely better than never.

Is there something sub-optimal you do that is infinitely better than not doing it at all? Comment below (& I always appreciate ♥’s)

New episodes of my podcast, Love Your Work go live, sub-optimally, on Thursdays. Listen to interview with Jason Fried, or subscribe on iTunes.