Practising Essentialism

When the term “less is more” was first coined by poet Robert Browning in one of his poems somewhere in the middle of the 19th Century and a century later by the famous designer and architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe to describe the modernist design and architecture, few could have contemplated that it could also be used in the corporate world.

Yes, the much maligned ocean of capitalistic, selfish, soulless, profit chasing, work demanding corporate world with islands of compassion. “More is more” defines it better and still does in the eyes of many; not far removed than the notorious and frustrating “do more” that the Pakistani government keeps hearing from both international lenders and allies.

With that in mind, to come across the book ‘Essentialism’ (now a New York Times bestseller) where its author, Greg McKeown, stresses on doing less to achieve more, was as much unexpected, as it is fascinating. ‘Less’ here is not conceived in the definitive form of course; we all need to work hard. Just that it tells you to cut back on doing a lot of things that are just not essential. Not too dissimilar to “do not work hard; work smart”; but with where and what to work complementing it.

McKeown builds — either deliberately or by default — on the book “Less but Better” by Dieter Rams, the famous industrial design specialist that featured 20 of his product designs based on simplicity and the lack of clutter.

In his book everything that McKeown writes is based on the seminal statement: just because you are active does not mean you are productive. As he puts it: the disciplined pursuit of less.

One of the ways to do that is to have to say ‘No’ to a lot of things at work. Difficult, I know, especially when you have got a toxic boss or someone who believes everything is important and urgent. But you just have to prioritise.

The essentialist will do that even as the non-essentialist keeps agreeing that everything is important and keeps finding ways to fit it all in. On the contrary, the essentialist will insist that only a few things matter and ask what is the tradeoff?

When I was head of marketing, it seemed the whole world was conspiring against us. Competition kept launching new brands or incentives for the retailers, our distributors kept asking for more stock that the factory could not package fast enough and the truckers kept asking for more money. It meant long days and late nights of firefighting internally and externally. However, one thing I would always list down was what would make the sky fall if I did not handle it first. And what was it that I had to do that, if it was not done, would not make the sky fall at all.

That is the key. Ask yourself that same question and cut through the noise to hear the answer in your mind. Not everything has to be done or at least done simultaneously. Go to your work colleagues who are pressing you for something and get to the core of their problem.

Sometimes, they will actually agree to waiting for a bit. I know because it worked for me. Often they make noise to get a deadline met a few days before the actual deadline. Just tell the person your to-do list and mention what is your priority. They are all reasonable people and will understand and cooperate. As long as you are honest about the time available to you.

More than that though, you have to be honest to yourself when it comes to trade-offs. Sometimes, we do things that come easier or are more enjoyable to do. So we do them first or give them more time, while a tougher ask is shelved. We rationalise, of course, but if we cut through our bias — or fear if you may — we may actually accept that another task is way more important, no matter how problematic it is.

What you can do is to look at all the tasks you have to do and ask yourself that if you could only do one today, which one would it be? The one you decide will become your first priority for the day.

Trade-offs also have to be made between professional and personal life. I was guilty of neglecting my personal life and goals and never really write that book when I had the energy and the time was right. Those extra two to three hours I spent on working on things that I could have delegated or trusted a subordinate to do would have been better spent on achieving my personal goals. But I was so attracted to creative ideas and their execution that often I would spend hours per week on random thinking, a lot of which would not happen.

All very simple you would say but not practical. I disagree. It looks like that when you are in a rush, physically or mentally. But there will always be that half hour you can find where you cut through the clutter in your mind or write down everything you have to do and then assign them numbers.

Not just to list them in order of priority but also to see what would lead to a better number on the income statement or the balance-sheet of the company. As McKeown says: “In order to have focus, we need to escape to have focus.”

The Pareto Principle, which says that 80 per cent of the consequences come from 20 per cent of causes (for example, 80 per cent of your revenue comes from 20 per cent of your clients) can apply here also. As McKeown points out: Essentialists do not say “what do I have to give up?” They say, “what do I want to go big on?”

I recall one time when I had to buy a crucial ERP for my company and desperately needed time with a CEO of the group’s IT company from whom I wanted to buy that ERP. It meant a couple of one hour sessions and a lot of brainstorming, as high-level input was required. But it was always a challenge getting time with him and once when I mentioned it to the Group vice president, he told me that he is pursuing a million dollar contract and is spending all his time with covering all aspects of it and has just cut himself off with all other work as if he gets that contract, the company is set for the next three years. So yes, you just have to be at times very selfish even if it affects a relationship.

McKeown also brings forward the point that a non-essentialist will end up feeling out of control and exhausted, which will affect his decision making and even the quality of work. The essentialist is aware of that and makes time for the important work to ensure it gets done to the best of possibilities.

There may be the boss who will not understand but the majority will do if you just have a word that doing a lot of tasks simultaneously will affect the quality of the more important work that needs to be done. Remember the boss was once a subordinate too.

Another area where essentialism is needed is when you need to cut your losses and close a project that is not working or has a lower opportunity cost. For instance, I had a client who had launched an initiative, which was clearly not going anywhere; if at all it had achieved the opposite reaction from the audience. I told him that it was better to cut your losses and focus on another opportunity that was available and which was on his list. But he kept giving more time and money to the initiative he had started. The end result was that he missed the boat on the initiative that sat on his list and eventually also had to close down that project. Just because he got his priorities wrong.

Essentialism is everywhere. McKeown gives an example of a filmmaker when he says: A good filmmaker makes it hard not to see what is not important because s/he eliminates everything but the elements that absolutely need to be there.

It is the same in your professional and personal life. Think of yourself as a film that is being watched. And live it so it becomes essential viewing.

(The writer is a corporate consultant, coach and former CEO with over 35 years of experience in leadership, building brands and organisational strategy. He now advises on business strategy, marketing, HR and media management)