TL;DR
This article explores the heterogeneous nature of progress, focusing on binary progress in either/or situations. It highlights the contrast between linear progress, which is intuitive, and more complex forms of progress that emerge as undertakings become more complex. The article introduces binary progress, explaining how it manifests in situations where outcomes are either achieved or not. It argues that for those involved in such either/or tasks, understanding binary progress can help avoid the false sense of advancement that often comes with erroneously gauging progress with markers that are work for other forms of progress and not binary progress. The article concludes by asserting that progress is as much about recognizing the right indicators as it is about the journey itself, and by internalizing different forms of progress, individuals are better equipped to pursue challenging goals with resilience.
“Binary progress occurs when you have long periods of boredom punctuated by moments of terror” ~ Adapted
Not all progress is linear. Since you have heard that before, I have a question for you: what does that mean for your projects and goals?
This article’s brevity is proof that it is no attempt to circumscribe the subject of the nature of progress. For all its pretensions, it is merely an attempt to add to a very broad subject that is open to boundless subjective interpretation.
So much of what we experience throughout the course of our lives strengthens our intuitive understanding of linear progress. When we first learn to count, we count in steps of one. Those who have the unfortunate task of coming up with ice-breakers at dreaded conferences know this all too well, and often impress us to much unexpected laughter by challenging us to count with kaleidoscopic rules. When we progress at school, we only move from the 1st grade to the 2nd, and all those who most recently were in 1st grade and mistakenly find themselves in the 3rd grade classroom are escorted back by bewildered schoolmasters to their rightful 2nd grade. Of course every now and then, there is a particularly brilliant student that defies the laws of linearity; but they are the exception, and we treat them as such. From our daily endeavors to keep track of our; time, money, and dates, so much progress that we experience on a daily basis does not only come linearly, but also comes with visible increments that make it harder for us to conceptualize and notice other forms of progress.
As we grow older and expectedly become more concerned about money, another type of progress - exponential progress - etches itself against much resistance into our psyches. With age comes more hospitality to the bankers, who never tire in their efforts to convince us that we are better off keeping our money locked in savings accounts. Even here, many people start off with the misconception that such submissions to the banker are only advantageous because they prevent careless spending. It takes quite a while (and sometimes an infinity) for it to become obvious that compound interest - which is the manifestation of exponential progress - is the more convincing reason to favorably consider the banker’s exigencies. Exponential progress also becomes more apparent as we watch our friends grow rich; we get an intuitive appreciation of the wisdom of St. Mathew’s gospel, that “… to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance…”
More often than not, we learn about the various types of progress after several encounters with scenarios in which they manifest; we develop an intuitive understanding that for some translates into an intellectual understanding. The downside of this being that for undertakings in which the nature of progress does not match our hitherto understanding of progress, only those who elevate process above progress and the passionate and delusional hang in long enough to see results.
Perhaps it is a good idea to develop an intellectual understanding of the various forms of progress, and then to draw inspiration for resilience when our superior understanding accelerates our ability to discern situations in which the apparent absence of progress - as defined by the previously experienced forms of progress - is in fact a manifestation of a different, and yet equally important form of progress.
One type of progress that is arguably not as popular as it deserves to be can be called binary progress. It may have been altogether better to call it zero-to-one progress, but for the sorry fact that nothing stops it from suddenly becoming one-to-two, and two-to-three progress. This type of progress emerges in mainly two situations: firstly, when something simply is or is not, where completeness is not only an attribute but a defining characteristic, and secondly, when boundaries are elusive and fluid, synthesis and perpetual movement are characteristic, and value only exists at the frontiers. I think that this type of progress is bound to emerge for original thinkers and pacesetters and as such an improved, intuitive understanding of its nature is a prerequisite for the resilience that is indispensable for such persons.
Let us begin with the first category of things; those that either are, or are not (we will call them either/or undertakings).
In truth, it is not so easy to say if there are undertakings that are purely either/or. One could say with good reason that it is our perception that makes the undertakings in question exhibit such characteristics. For example, sometimes we are so intently focused on completion that it becomes the only form of progress. If your boss were to assign to you a task that can be completed in multiple (and sometimes unknown ways), all that matters will whether or not it was completed; progress is evaluated only once, and it is either done or not done. Situations in which outcomes are defined by multiple interactions with multiple stakeholders also produce either/or situations. This is because the multiplicity of pathways render any talk of progress (which is inherently path dependent) meaningless to those who are not on that path. A good example of this scenario is how we think of a government’s progress in political negotiations. For those not participating in government, what matters is whether an agreement was reached. The public, or even other members of the government, typically don’t see or value the intricate steps, conversations, or compromises that occurred throughout the process and the only tangible result is if a deal was reached or not, making it an “either/or” outcome. Another good example is trying to develop a new method for achieving a goal where there are already established methods. In such situations, using the old method tends to be a zero marginal cost decision, and any attempts to deviate are only valuable on a one-shot basis if they produce the desired goal1.
The second category is truly a category for innovators. Since we tend to understate, instead of overstate the ubiquity of innovation, innovators should be interpreted very loosely here. For instance, many of us are prone to perceiving innovation as a highly-intellectual activity that lives in a shiny ivory tower; we fail to realize that more innovation is done in practice than is recorded or captured in formalisms. This shortcoming of ours does not in anyway dwindle the fact that to innovate we must 1) have immense domain knowledge that allows us to operate at the frontiers of a field, and 2) be constantly synthesizing in pursuit of new combinations, and 3) keep expanding our domain knowledge as other innovators push the boundaries. In this sense, entrepreneurs, PhD students (the inconspicuous pillar of science), and almost everyone is innovating at a certain level.
However, the preoccupation to innovate makes progress illusive when all that seems to be happening is building domain knowledge and getting familiar with the work of others. This illusion can be particularly excruciating in fields that are either broad or constituted of constantly changing sub-fields. In such fields, one starts off hoping to dwell on the broader field (that often seems less broad at the start) and the unforeseen and demanding prerequisites of working through the rabbit holes of the sub-fields can create a sense of disillusionment and cause one to question their progress. When we consider that many situations in which people are expected to innovate have an invisible sword of Damocles hanging over their heads - publish or perish, innovate or be outgunned in business wars - the chasm between the making of progress and the perception of progress can create immense anxiety.
Is it really important for one to feel that they are making progress? I think it absolutely is. As human beings, the presence of dopamine or absence thereof plays a huge role in our appreciation of the quality of our lives. Making progress (or the perception of making progress) stimulates dopamine release and can inspire us to try again; growth can beget growth. Conversely, not making progress (or the perception of not making progress) can lower our dopamine levels and in discouraging effort, require us to exercise more will power towards a given undertaking; decadence can beget decadence. To put it better, the more complete quote from St. Mathew’s gospel has it that “… to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away”.
However, while we need progress (or the perception of it) to facilitate the undertaking of our goals, it is obviously self-defeating if we approach either/or projects with an outlook that promises to create a perception of progress irrespective of whether or not in essence it is being made. This attitude is rampant; we assume that we can create a roadmap for achieving an either/or task (a priori), and then congratulate ourselves through the roadmap only to be baffled at the tail realization that the starting goal has not been achieved. If we must not delude ourselves, how then can we feel progress that is binary in nature? How can we appreciate and react to the things that will lead us to binary progress?
While there may be a multiplicity of valid responses to this impending question, I think that any valid response will 1) emphasize the importance of appreciating when an undertaking is an either/or undertaking, and 2) emphasize the need to fast track the duration it takes from setting the goal to having a testable version of the outcome2 and 3) emphasize the importance of decision making under uncertainty. We will elaborate the above mentioned qualities in a subsequent essay.
The purpose of this article was to introduce the heterogeneous nature of progress, to emphasize its importance (or its perception), and to explore binary progress as manifested in either/or undertakings. We began by demonstrating that while linear progress is easily intuitive, we can encounter different forms of progress as our undertakings become more complex in nature. We then introduced the concept of binary progress and the either/or situations in which it is likely to be observed. The article argued that for those engaged in either/or undertakings, recognizing the nature of binary progress can foster resilience in the face of ambiguity and help avoid the false sense of advancement that linear or continuous markers might offer when erroneously applied to either/or undertakings. In doing so, the article made the case that progress is as much about recognizing the right indicators as it is about the journey itself, and by understanding and internalizing these different forms, we become better equipped to effectively and fulfillingly pursue goals that require different types of resilience.