The surprising efficiency of being boring
Summary
It takes a special discipline to push back against novelty and embrace routine, boring solutions. That discipline, however, can lead to surprising efficiency.
A few years back, I read about GitLab’s values. While it’s remarkable that they describe their values in such detail, a small detail caught my eye. Under the explanation of their “Efficiency” value, GitLab lists the importance of “Boring solutions”. In an industry where everyone loves a shiny new toy, where ideas are dime-a-dozen, and hand-waving can often win over a boardroom, advocating for “boring solutions” seems mildly iconoclastic.
As humans, we instinctively seek novelty, adventure, and stimulation. Paradoxically, the more boring a task, the more familiar we are with it, and the more efficient we are at executing it. Indeed, this paradox represents the chasm between doers and ideators. In an age of AI, ideas are cheaper than ever. Execution, while more inexpensive on the surface, has many externalised costs.
GitLab explains its bias for the boring stuff by invoking its ability to deliver at a frenetic pace. They’re not a perfect company by any means, but surely they’re doing something right if they can deliver with such confidence.
The tradeoff that I take away from GitLab’s values is that the shiny new toy may be seductive, but the boring alternative may be more efficient. Indeed, this tradeoff is apparent in many aspects of work.
Brainstorming ideas is exciting (I’m rolling my eyes, by the way). Planning to deliver on even one idea is boring. Staying the course and following through on a plan? Kill me already! Guess who gets more done, though? The idea-rich brainstormer or the action-oriented planner?
It takes approximately 10,000 hours to become proficient at something. That’s 10 years of doing something for four hours a day. Is it likely that you’ll have to explore boredom at some point? Hell yeah! Will you ever improve if you don’t put in the reps? You know the answer.
Saying yes to a new request can be exciting. Doing fewer things, as Cal Newport advises, is boring. Those who say “No” by default often get more done than the ambassadors of performative productivity who have “so much going on”.
Of course, novelty isn’t inherently bad. It’s a truism, however, that the more novelty in your day-to-day work, the less efficient you’re likely to be. The more things you involve yourself in, the more shapeless your day will look. And as a result of it all, you’ll enjoy a poorer work-life balance.
There will always be some of us for whom their jobs are their calling — more power to them. In contrast, the vast majority of us need just a good enough job. Good enough that we gain some intellectual stimulation from it, and that it compensates us fairly for our efforts. If you’re part of this vast majority, consider swimming against the tide.
Build the deep work muscle.
Resist the novelty.
Stay the course.
Be predictable.
Be efficient.
Be boring.
And when the day ends, shut your computer and go back to your real life.