# [[Quit]] ## Summary > [!abstract] Summary > We are socially conditioned to value perseverance over quitting. This mistake is further exacerbated by our tendency not to quit because of cognitive biases, such as overvaluing the importance of past effort when it comes to assessing future possibilities or being unable to quit something that we feel is part of our identity. > > In fact, quitting is a skill we should cultivate. We should accept that we have a tendency to skew towards persevering and use techniques to try to overcorrect, such as doing a premortem to establish conditions under which we will quit something, tackling the hardest parts of a venture first to reduce the sunk cost, and finding someone who'll act like a quitting coach. ## Thesis > [!question] What are the main points of the book? > What was the author trying to say? Identify the overarching ideas and how the author connected them. ### [[Optimal quitting]] is the quitting at just the right time The concept of optimal quitting, borrowed from the mathematical concept [[Optimal stopping]], is discontinuing a course of action at exactly the right time: after most (or all) of the benefits have been reaped and before most (or any) of the detriments are realised. ### We are predisposed and conditioned to stay past the point of optimal quitting There are many factors why it's difficult to identify the point of optimal quitting: - We're socialized to prize perseverance and morally sanction giving up. - Quitting in time often feels like quitting early (because "in time" would be *before* the pain is felt). - The [[Sunk cost fallacy]] can lead to an [[Escalation of commitment]] in the face of negative outcomes - [[Uncertainty]] aversion makes us prefer to keep going. Quitting gives us less certainty than staying in the game, and we hate uncertainty. - [[Endowment effect]] makes us less likely to quit something we own (or have built - [[Ikea Effect]]). - [[Status quo bias]] means that we're more likely to choose the course of action that doesn't "rock the boat", that introduces the least amount of change. - The [[Omission-commission bias]] makes us prefer the more passive action: we'd rather miss out because we didn't choose something fast enough than make a decision too fast and choose the wrong thing, even if the two outcomes are the same. - [[Cognitive dissonance]] from facts not lining up with what we hope for causes us to double down and escalate our commitment further, rather than causing us to question our actions in the first place. - [[Enmeshment]] of the thing we're thinking of quitting into our [[Identity]] makes the thought of quitting it feel like quitting who we are. - We quit less frequently when we're [[The Observer Effect|being observed]]. - Setting clear goals that are pass/fail, or defining clear finish lines, can increase our tendency to escalate commitment at the exclusion of all else. ### There are ways to help us better identify when to optimally quit The author proposes some suggestions we can use to counter our tendencies to stay longer than we should: - Come up with [[Exit criteria]] for when we should quit something before we begin, and follow through. The author calls this a [[Premortem]]. - If a decision to "grit or quit" feels close... it's probably not. Err on the side of quitting. It will make you happier in the long run. - Tackle [[Training the monkey]] first, meaning that you should tackle the hardest part of the problem (training the monkey to dance) and leave the easy problem for later (buying a pedestal for the monkey to stand on). This way, you find out quickly whether you need to pull out (such as if the monkey can't be trained), making it easier to quit. - Ask someone who loves you to be your quitting coach. Give them explicit permission to tell you things you don't want to hear, even if it hurts your feelings. - Never stop exploring, because exploration reduces uncertainty in quitting and gives you a backup plan. This is especially true if you're forced into quitting by circumstance. - Make goals that: - aren't pass/fail - you review regularly and adjust as necessary - have at least one "unless" to get you out of it if you need to. ## Antithesis > [!question] What was missing? > Identify points the author made that you disagree with or feel should have been included. What are some related ideas from other authors that might conflict with this author's ideas? ### Practical solutions for when to quit The book was really about *why* we should quit more often, and earlier, than we do. It didn't really discuss how to determine when to do so. Optimal stopping theory is also called "The Secretary Problem", consisting of a hypothetical scenario where an individual must hire a secretary and faces the problem of how many to interview before they make a candidate an offer. ### The Odds Algorithm [[The Odds Algorithm]] provides a nice heuristic that could have been used here: > Interview the first 37% of the candidates. After that, extend an offer to the first candidate who is better than all the candidates seen so far. ### [[The Threshold Rule]] Even simpler than the Odds Algorithm is the threshold rule, which involves setting requirements for a candidate and then extending the offer to the first one we interview that exceeds that threshold. ### Dynamic programming [[Dynamic programming]] is a more accurate solution, but also more difficult to put into practice for most. These solutions may still be oversimplifications, as all [[Mental models]] are, but they might have provided more grounding in mathematics and heuristics. ### [[Closure]] and psychological context The author didn't really go into the value of [[Closure]], and how the need for that differs from person to person. The book encouraged early (or earlier) quitting, but didn't take into consideration the fact that for some people, it may be beneficial to quit later-- not because they're having difficulty making a decision, but because sometimes, the psychological satisfaction of seeing all the options may be more valuable. ## Synthesis > [!question] Middle ground > How would you reconcile conflicting ideas? What are some other similar ideas you've heard of from others? How is this relevant to you? - Many of the reasons the author mentioned for why we don't quit as often or as early as we do are [[Cognitive Biases]]. - [[Daniel Kahneman]]'s [[Fast Thinking]] and [[Slow Thinking]] (which he calls "System 1" and "System 2", loosely defined as intuition and analytical thinking, respectively) talk about how different modes of thinking are engaged at different times, and how this shapes the way we make decisions. - [[Decision fatigue]] - [[Optimal stopping]] in [[Software Testing]] is of particular importance because [[Exhaustive testing is impossible and impractical]]. Identifying the point of optimal stopping can look like: - Establishing [[Exit criteria]] before testing. - Defining [[Requirements]] in conjunction with the business to be able to clearly assess whether or not the code delivered meets those requirements. - Using [[Timeboxing]], or expending the allotted time to be spent for testing, such as within an [[Agile]] [[Sprint]]. - Doing [[Good testing is context-dependent and risk-based|a risk assessment]] and testing only to ensure the highest risks have beem mitigated. - In [[Site Reliability Engineering]], [[Continuous Improvement|CI/CD]] pipelines and [[Observability]] tools are used to reduce the need to determine a point of optimal stopping, when a build is released to production. Instead, that approach could be said to be a hybrid one, where in one sense, a stop to development is called (in that code is release to production), buit in another, the development never stops (in the form of constantly monitoring the code in production and remediating when necessary). - In [[Productivity]], optimal stopping can be applied to reduce [[Metawork]], or work to set up a system within which the work can take place, often called "productivity porn". - [[Analysis Paralysis]] is the term among [[Board games|board gamers]] to describe the state where someone has so many options to choose from that they are unable to formulate a strategy. [[Complex systems]], and the [[Uncertainty]] inherent in them, make it impossible to [[Decision-making|make a decision]] that fully takes into account all the facts. - In [[Relationships|relationships]], optimal stopping can mean determining whether or not to [[Separation|end a relationship]]. ## Related - [[readwise/Books/Quit|Quit - my Readwise highlights]] - [[Optimal quitting-2024-01-25-13-02.pdf|My Kindle Scribe notes]] - [[Prospect theory]]