What does the car Homer Simpson designed have to teach us about adding value by subtraction?
In a 1991 episode of The Simpsons, Homer’s half brother, Herb, brought Homer Simpson on the payroll of his company (at $200K/year!) to design a car for the average American. He gave Homer the ultimate authority in decision making, so Homer exercised those rights.
What did Homer want in a car? Everything.
Tail fins! Extra large cup holders! A ball on the antenna! Shag carpeting! Bubble domes!
He and the designers even put in a separate sound proof bubble dome for the kids with restraints and muzzles.
Unfortunately, with every addition, the value of the overall package was reduced. The final result was a “monstrosity” with an $82,000 sticker price (in 1991!) that bankrupted Herb’s company.
Sometimes less is more. Sometimes addition is subtraction.
On the surface it makes sense that each thing you add to a group increases the resulting value. I mean, if each individual thing has value, then simple arithmetic means that adding them together creates even MORE value.
There are times when this is true, which is why we’ve all likely heard the term “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” 1 + 1 = 3
But there are also times when 3 + 3 = 1. Adding things together can decrease value, too.
Today we’ll look at a few of the principles that underpin this idea, and then a handful of examples where they play out in real life.
The principles we’ll explore are:
- Parsimony
- Miller’s Law
- Paradox of Choice
Parsimony
The Principle of Parsimony, connected to Occam’s Razor, is often translated in modern day language to mean that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
In the natural world, things operate in ways in which they conserve energy, meaning they usually operate in a straightforward manner. A apple falls straight down from a tree; it doesn’t fly around for five minutes.
This is why doctor’s often look for the most straightforward explanation for an illness; “if you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras.”
So the more you add to something, the more complex it becomes. It moves further away from simplicity and can put tension on this Principle of Parsimony.
Miller’s Law
This law states that human’s have a limited working memory. We can hold roughly seven pieces of information in our heads at a time. This is why phone numbers in the US are seven digits long.
The seven things can be digits like a phone number, but they can also be ‘chunks’ of information, like a single word, or a person’s face.
Give us greater than seven things to remember, and they start to fall out of our working memory.
Paradox of Choice
The Paradox of Choice states that as you provide a greater number of options, humans get overwhelmed. Humans have a limited capacity for processing information. The more choices you provide to someone, the more difficult it is for them to make a decision.
This is why you often want to limit the choices you provide consumers. There’s a study from university psychologists about jam in which they provided consumers a booth with six options, and another with 24 options.
You’d think the one with more options would sell more, when in fact it was the opposite. 30% of consumers purchased a jar from the limited selection, and only 3% from the extensive collection. That’s 10x more sales by cutting the options by 75%!
Examples and Practical Application
There are so many interesting examples of where “addition is subtraction” comes into play! Rather than select just a couple, let’s look at…seven. In honor of Mr. Miller 🙂
1. Debate and Persuasion - The more arguments you add in an attempt to convince someone, then less you’re likely to convince them. The arguments overload their processing. Each argument gives them an opportunity to disagree, and if they disagree with one, they’ll often discount your entire argument.
2. Strategic Speed - In strategy people often want certainty. They want more information. One more data pull. One more experiment. One more discussion. One more…you get it. Not only will more pieces of information likely confuse the strategic team and dilute the point, adding more things also subtracts from speed.
“As we request more information, one more spreadsheet, additional data, streams of data, we end up with countless meetings. Too frequently, we find ourselves spinning. The discussion becomes a debate and drags on, sapping our vitality. And so, we prolong the process, seeking more data. We make slow decisions, misguided decisions, and—sometimes—no decisions.”
- Decisions Over Decimals, Christopher J. Frank
3. Interviewing - It’s common during interview to increase the size of the panel; you go from 3-4 up to 6-8. More people muddies the water are more complex perspectives are shared and contradict. It’s not clear who to believe or how to process the information. Speed and hiring quality suffers.
4. Commitments - The more commitments you give yourself or your team, the less likely you are to achieve any of them. Each one is a drain on resources. Adding commitments does not increase your goals as much as it reduces your likelihood of success.
“Essentialists spend as much time as possible exploring, listening, debating, questioning, and thinking. But their exploration is not an end in itself. The purpose of the exploration is to discern the vital few from the trivial many.”
— Essentialism, Greg McKeown
5. Business Dashboards - Metrics are super fun! Colors and charts are fun! Why not add one more to your dashboard? Before you know it you’ve got dozens of dashboards with dozens of charts. You become lost in a sea of information with no insight.
“Our business dashboards should look more like our car dashboards, working backward from the decision that the decision‐maker needs to make, and clearly presenting the information ‐ and only the information ‐ that is relevant and useful, and at the appropriate granularity level, for our decision‐making.”
— Decisions Over Decimals, Christopher J. Frank
6. Meeting Participants - It’s common to add more people to a meeting invite, even when the rationale is weak. That’s more people to insert their opinion. It’s more schedules to coordinate. It diffuses accountability and responsibility.
7. Product Features and UI - We already saw the effect of adding features with Homer’s car. The applications you use are effective because they simplify the user interaction. If the designers go overboard and add a ton of elements, it creates architecture and code issues on the product end, and users get confused and lost.
What other examples have you seen where the addition of something reduces quality, speed, or impact?
We now know that adding things isn’t always better; it can subtract from the thing we care about. It’s unintuitive, but subtracting is often what adds value.
We know this idea is connected to the Principle of Parsimony, Miller’s Law, and the Paradox of Choice. We’ve also seen seven different examples of where this plays out in real life.
Let’s take this information into life this week and find an opportunity to make a change. This week try to be aware of where you’re caught up in “addition.” Subtract things - don’t add them - to create more value and speed.
For example, are you over-arguing your case? Convey, don’t convince. Simplify your message and focus on just three key things.
Are you bloating your meeting list, your feature list, your commitments, or your data requests? Look for an opportunity to simplify and reduce the asks.
Good luck this week! Let me know if you made any changes after reflecting on these ideas this week. Hit reply and let me know!
Kevin 🤗