What is valuable is reality, not its label

We waste too much time advocating labels.

A few months ago, I processed with my Zettelkasten the original article on SMART goals¹. It was valuable processing for many reasons. However, the idea I liked the most was outside the topic of SMART goals: “The most important consideration is not to have the label get in the way of effective communication”.

Today, we are being bombarded by a myriad of new labels. This is especially acute in the world of personal knowledge management. For example, it is now fashionable to talk about evergreen notes, permanent notes, content notes, maps of content, structural notes, bibliographic notes,… and a long etcetera.².

The problem is that we waste (or, at least, I wasted) too much time defending which label should be used instead of focusing on what really generates value.

In this article, I show you the following:

• why there is no value in defending the use of a label
• how you can focus on what really generates value
• in which situation you should take care of what label you use.

Use the most efficient label for communication

Although it may be fashionable to debate the differences between goals and objectives in our graduate business school, from a practical point of view the label doesn’t make any difference provided officers/managers agree on the meaning of theese words. In some cases, goals are short-term and objectives are long-term. In others, the opposite is true. To other organizations, goals and objectives are synonymous. Time should not be wasted in debate over these terms. The important consideration is not to have the label get in the way of effective communication.

—“There’s a SMART way to write management’s goals and objectives” by George T. Doran.

We create value when we invest our time in understanding and communicating reality. In the case of SMART goals, the discussion between using the label “goal” or “objective” does not produce value. It doesn’t matter which label we use. What is valuable is the discussion of what are the criteria that allow us to define good goals/objectives.

Therefore, the ideal is to use the label that least hinders communication according to the context. I have my preferred labels for reality (e.g., use “goal” for short and long term). However, I do not waste my time defending their use. If I have to use another label to communicate efficiently with another person, I will use that label (I will use “objetive” if it is the most efficient).

This strategy is a way to focus on generating value in a debate:

• What reality is the other person seeing?
• Is it the same one I’m seeing?
• How can I make sure we are talking about the same thing?
• Can this debate really affect the way I work or think?

Ultimately, this strategy is a way to train your ability to clearly discern.

Some labels distort reality

However, there is an exception.

Sometimes, a label has connotations that are not present in reality. In these cases, a label is not neutral; it is a filter that distorts reality. It is a filter that impedes us from clearly discerning.

For example, labeling yourself as “responsible” is not the same as labeling yourself as “demanding”. Both labels can refer to the same reality: a person who makes what they set out to. However, notice how being “responsible” has positive connotations (consistent, formal, prudent), while being “demanding” has negative connotations (rigorous, severe, rigid). Are these connotations in reality, or are they an undesirable distortion due to the label?

In this situation, avoiding labels that distort reality is important. You may even be justified in investing your time in defending the proper label to use in a debate. However, don’t get hung up on whether the other person uses the correct label (that’s not in your control). Instead, make sure that you personally use the proper label: make sure that your personal view is clear.³

Conclusion: A clear view of reality

We create value by understanding and communicating reality, not by advocating using a label. In fact, as long as a label does not distort reality, it makes no difference which labels we use. Therefore, the strategy is to use the most efficient label according to the context.

Going back to the example of personal knowledge management. Some people call “permanent note” what others call “evergreen note”, but the important thing is not the label they use, but what they do with those notes in reality: how it helps them connect ideas and improve their thinking. So forget the labels and focus your attention on reality:

• What do other people do «in reality» with their notes?
• How is it different from what you are already doing?
• What can you change to take better notes?

Answering these questions is what really generates value.

And you, do you look at the finger… or do you look at the moon?

You can answer me in the comments or directly to this email. In both cases, I’ll get back to you :-)

References: