The Shift to Remote Work: A Pivotal Innovation of the 21st Century

In retrospect, historians will regard remote work as a major development, akin to the rise of factory work in the 19th century.

Educators will teach future generations how remote work transformed global recruitment, asynchronous collaboration across time zones, organizational structures, communication methods, cultural development, and office design.

This transformation set off a chain reaction leading to even more significant changes. Remote work has:

• Empowered talent across the globe with internet access.
• Altered the balance between personal life and professional responsibilities.
• Changed the configuration and location of technology hubs.
• Influenced where people choose to reside, affecting political power dynamics.
• Diminished governmental authority as individuals can relocate more easily if they disagree with local policies.

In hindsight, these changes will appear obvious.

Yet, several aspects concern me…

• Without the pandemic, it might have taken many more years for this transition to occur.
• Even the most astute innovators and venture capitalists, like the renowned Marc Andreessen, underestimated its potential.
• Alarmingly, there had been minimal experimentation with remote work prior to the pandemic.
• The transition for millions who had spent their lives working in offices or attending schools was surprisingly smooth, indicating that the primary barrier to change was not feasibility or difficulty.

What transpired here?

Common belief suggests that if an innovation is valuable and feasible, it should be adopted immediately.

The move to remote work reveals flaws in this conventional wisdom. Significant innovations in science and work often remain unutilized for decades or even centuries. Consider the following…

Suitcase Wheels: An Invention Delayed Until the 1980s

History is filled with impactful scientific discoveries and technological advancements that languished for centuries:

• Gunpowder: The Chinese invented it but only used it for fireworks, as noted by researcher David Nye.
• The Wheel: The Aztecs developed the wheel, but it was limited to children's toys, according to Nye.
• Steam Engine: The ancient Greeks created a small steam engine but viewed it merely as a curiosity. It took over fifty years for significant advancements to arise.
• Concrete: The Romans discovered poured concrete, but the technique was forgotten and only rediscovered centuries later.
• Electricity: The knowledge of static electricity dates back to ancient Greece, yet substantial advancements took over two millennia to materialize.
• Penicillin: Discovered in 1928, it was largely ignored due to challenges in production until the early 1940s.
• Scurvy Cure: A lime juice regimen was demonstrated as a remedy in 1747, but it took over 40 years for it to be adopted by the British Navy.

These foundational technologies that we now take for granted could have taken centuries longer to emerge.

Researcher Anton Howes provides further insight into this issue in his paper, The Spread of Improvement: Why Innovation Accelerated in Britain 1547–1851:

> “Consider John Kay’s flying shuttle, renowned for enhancing weaving efficiency. Its invention is remarkable because it could have easily been developed centuries earlier. Despite the knowledge of shuttles, the improvement only materialized in 1733.”

Instead of questioning why the flying shuttle was invented in 1733, we should ponder why it didn't emerge centuries prior. This revolutionary advancement in the Industrial Revolution was merely a slight modification of an ancient industry using existing materials and knowledge.

Howes also highlights the wheel as another invention that could have appeared much earlier:

> “Chinese innovators created multi-spindle spinning wheels and treadle looms by the 11th century. They even devised a ‘proto Bessemer converter’ by 1690, which didn’t emerge in Britain until the 1850s.”

In 1911, a groundbreaking science revealed how to be 50 times more productive without extending work hours, illustrating that inventions are not the only stymied elements. Simple productivity enhancements in fields like bricklaying and assembly have stagnated for millennia despite straightforward solutions.

Researcher David Nye summarizes this phenomenon of innovation stagnation:

> “Innovation for a specific device may pause for decades or even centuries until someone reconceptualizes its design or use.”

He further notes:

> “A society may create various objects without ever combining them into something that, in hindsight, appears obvious.”

Elon Musk adds context with the following reflection from a TED interview:

> “People are wrong to assume that technology improves automatically. It requires significant effort from many individuals to enhance it, and often it can regress. Great civilizations, like Ancient Egypt, managed to construct the pyramids but forgot how to do so. The Romans built impressive aqueducts but lost that knowledge.”

In summary…

These cases and quotes highlight how transformative concepts can remain hidden for decades, centuries, or even millennia. The emergence or acceptance of improvements is neither guaranteed nor consistent.

Even those best positioned to recognize the potential of an improvement can overlook it. Millions can practice a skill daily and still miss simple innovations that appear evident in hindsight. A pertinent example is self-made billionaire Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape, who is now a leading venture capitalist…

The Marc Andreessen Blindspot

In a thought-provoking 2015 interview on the Tim Ferriss Show, Matt Mullenweg, creator of WordPress and founder of Automattic, recounted his experience pitching Andreessen for funding:

> “During our first meeting, the discussion revolved around the notion that distributed companies were a poor idea. He questioned what we knew that other successful tech companies did not.”

Reflecting on the meeting, Mullenweg later remarked:

> “I considered it the worst meeting of my career.”

Mullenweg's experience lingered in my thoughts. How could a leading innovator like Marc Andreessen overlook such a monumental shift in workplace dynamics?

Venture capitalists are expected to think from foundational principles and make bold, unconventional investments. Yet, the idea that if Andreessen could miss the remote work phenomenon, what does that imply for society's ability to recognize other vital innovations? Andreessen wasn't alone in his skepticism. His critiques of remote work mirrored conventional wisdom, and inventive minds often fail to recognize significant innovations right before them. For instance:

• Alfred Wallace refrained from publishing his theory of evolution, believing it too obvious. Darwin ultimately eclipsed him, leading to Wallace's obscurity.
• Mark Zuckerberg recalled driving into San Francisco and envisioning creating a company as large as those he saw on billboards, unaware that he was already building that company.
• This pattern is so prevalent in Silicon Valley that it is often said that major technological breakthroughs initially appear trivial.

However, credit goes to Andreessen. In 2021, he published a blog post completely reversing his previous stance, declaring:

> “It may be the most significant event of my lifetime, a consequence of the internet that's possibly more critical than the internet itself.” —Marc Andreessen

A year later, his venture capital firm transitioned to a remote-first model.

I present this example not to highlight the cognitive gaps of brilliant thinkers or to illustrate how venture capitalists can overlook major investments. Rather, the Marc Andreessen Blindspot serves as a valuable lesson:

• Significant innovations are often not apparent. An idea may seem clear in retrospect, but at the time, it may not be obvious, even among top-tier innovators.
• Andreessen's logic was sound. Most major tech companies up to that time operated in-person, making it reasonable to focus on Silicon Valley. The odds of a tech startup succeeding are exceedingly low. Thus, investing in a risky startup diverging from core products was not entirely irrational.

In conclusion…

The Marc Andreessen Blindspot illustrates that simple, transformative opportunities can remain overlooked indefinitely. Their potential is obscured not only from the public but also from the most intelligent and inventive individuals.

At its core, the Marc Andreessen Blindspot matters because it signifies that enormous potential for personal growth and productivity enhancement exists right before us, yet we fail to recognize it. This applies equally to broader company, scientific, and societal opportunities.

As I have grappled with the implications of the Marc Andreessen Blindspot, I have come to believe that we require a fundamentally new perspective on improvement. Below are the five foundational pillars of this framework:

Pillar 1: Cultivate Optimism as a Core Value

> “The possibilities that lie in the future are infinite. When I say ‘It is our duty to remain optimists,’ I mean not only embracing the future's openness but also recognizing our contributions to it through our actions.” —Karl Popper (renowned philosopher of science)

Theoretical physicist David Deutsch has profoundly influenced my thinking, particularly regarding the scientific method's essence, its history, and significance.

In The Beginning Of Infinity, he persuasively argues that optimism is key to knowledge evolution:

> “Pessimism has been pervasive in nearly every society throughout history… Occasionally, there have been brief moments of optimism, and I suspect they coincided with mini-enlightenments leading to progress in various fields, such as art, literature, science, and technology.” —David Deutsch

Deutsch further explores the detrimental effects of pessimism:

> “A pessimistic society views it as immoral to undertake actions that haven't been tried repeatedly, failing to recognize that the potential benefits may outweigh the risks. This leads to intolerance and conformity.” —David Deutsch

After learning about Deutsch's perspective, I encountered a striking survey of 18,235 adults from the US and Europe on today's pessimism. It revealed that a mere 3%-10% believe the world will improve.

This pessimism isn't entirely surprising given the rapid changes and media's negative bias. Yet, it is shocking in light of the tremendous untapped potential highlighted by innovation history.

Bottom line: In the face of today's visible struggles, optimism is essential to perceive the invisible opportunities of tomorrow. We must always remember that optimism is a fragile gift.

Pillar 2: Do Not Take Progress for Granted

As I discuss in We’re in a productivity crisis, according to 52 years of data. Things could get really bad, the growth in productivity over the past 300 years is astonishing when compared to the entirety of human history.

This surge has led to a transformative societal shift often undervalued today. Economic historian Joel Mokyr summarizes:

> “Before 1750, living standards were nearly universally miserable and poor.” —Joel Mokyr

Observing productivity charts might lead one to assume that progress is inevitable. However, David Deutsch points out a crucial oversight:

> “Every other civilization, barring our own Enlightenment, has seen progress halted and pessimism restored.” —David Deutsch

Moreover, history is filled with mini-enlightenments that ultimately faded:

• Ancient Greece (5th Century BCE)
• Islamic Golden Age (8th Century)
• Florence (14th Century)
• Dutch Golden Age (16th Century)
• Chinese Golden Age (16th Century)

Bottom line: Progress should not be taken for granted. Historically, no civilization or period of exceptional progress has lasted indefinitely.

Pillar 3: Establish a New Decision-Making Framework for Improvement — The Hero’s Journey

This article presents a paradox:

• When an innovation is glaringly important, individuals allocate time and resources to it.
• However, even the most obvious innovations can often be elusive.

Thus, personal and collective improvement requires optimistic innovators to dedicate time and resources to:

1. Seek enhancements before they become apparent.
2. Pursue visible opportunities even when returns and risks remain uncertain.

Just as past explorers embarked on journeys driven by hope, today's innovators venture forth toward undiscovered realms.

Explorers employ an underappreciated logic in decision-making to navigate this paradox. They embrace the Hero’s Journey, a framework we discuss in the Mental Model Club:

Instead of performing complex return-on-investment calculations, explorers ask themselves a fundamentally different question:

> “Do I wish to embark on the Hero’s Journey and embrace the call to adventure, or do I prefer to reinforce established values?”

Philosopher and decision-making theorist LA Paul encapsulates this notion at the end of her book Transformative Experience.

She outlines how conventional decision-making frameworks often fall short:

> “In transformative choices, we can't evaluate possibilities by stepping back; we lack the knowledge to gauge our lived experiences post-decision, making it impossible to assign values to potential outcomes.” —LA Paul

She then emphasizes the importance of valuing experiences for their own sake:

> “Resolving issues surrounding transformative experiences entails appreciating them for their intrinsic nature, regardless of whether that involves joy, fear, happiness, or suffering.” —LA Paul

Finally, she clarifies the trade-offs between undertaking a Hero’s Journey versus adhering to tradition:

> “Choosing a transformative experience means discovering its intrinsic value, which may involve creating and understanding new preferences and identities. Conversely, rejecting revelation means affirming the status quo.” —LA Paul

Bottom line: Innovation starts with the choice to be the kind of person who makes heroic decisions in life.

Pillar 4: Adopt an Improvement Mindset

While optimism is essential, another critical component is the Improvement Mindset. Researcher Anton Howes, previously mentioned, describes this mindset as comprising two key elements:

1. “Identifying problems where others see none.”
2. “Creating solutions for those issues.”

He contrasts the Improvement Mindset with conventional thinking:

> “Unlike the ‘if it ain't broke, don't fix it’ mentality, inventors see untapped potential for enhancement and cannot resist applying their solutions.” —Anton Howes

Leonardo Da Vinci exemplified the Improvement Mindset. According to author Michael Gelb, Da Vinci once expressed:

> “I regret being born in an era where all significant discoveries have already been made.” —Leonardo Da Vinci

This sentiment illustrates that even history's greatest inventor was not immune to the Marc Andreessen Blindspot. However, Da Vinci's evolution offers hope. He wasn't innately gifted at spotting every improvement opportunity; rather, through his actions and mindset, he gradually became more aware of them.

Bottom line: We should start each day with the intent to improve. Just as we maintain a To-Do list, we should also have a To-Improve list. Like Da Vinci, we may benefit from exploring our curiosity to train ourselves to identify improvement opportunities everywhere.

Pillar 5: Implement the 5-Hour Rule for Time Management

In today's work environment, the implicit focus is on execution:

• Identify necessary tasks.
• Complete them efficiently.
• Within a set timeframe.
• At a specific quality level.
• With zero defects.

Execution emphasizes repetition to achieve the desired outcome. However, simply doing the same tasks repeatedly doesn't lead to increased productivity. Once proficiency is achieved, performance often plateaus, a phenomenon known as the OK Plateau. Consider typing or driving — skills honed through repetition without automatic improvement.

To elevate execution, we require an Improvement Mindset, which may seem counterintuitive. This mindset involves an inherently inefficient process that ultimately results in substantial long-term productivity gains.

With an Improvement Mindset, we prioritize:

• Experimenting with productivity techniques that may yield uncertain results.
• Learning about best practices that take time to bear fruit.
• Trying new tools.
• Establishing non-existent habits.

It's essential to recognize that execution and improvement mindsets differ fundamentally, and their progress is measured in contrasting ways.

For instance, someone focused on execution will consistently perform correctly, facing possible repercussions for insufficient output or errors. In contrast, the improvement mindset entails engaging in activities that may not yield immediate results, with payoffs emerging over an extended period. When a breakthrough does occur, it can lead to monumental returns.

For example, spending 50 hours to enhance one task by 10% (or 10 minutes daily) could result in saving thousands of hours over a career due to improved productivity.

The following table outlines the distinctions between the execution mindset and the improvement mindset:

Based on my experience, one of the most effective strategies for developing an improvement mindset is to allocate five hours each week to deliberate learning, reflection, and experimentation. I refer to this as the 5-Hour Rule, which many top entrepreneurs, leaders, and innovators diligently practice throughout their careers, regardless of their schedules. For instance:

• Warren Buffett has dedicated 80% of his time since childhood to reading and contemplation.
• During his presidency, Barack Obama reserved an hour daily for reading.
• Even while establishing Microsoft, Bill Gates committed an hour a day to reading, frequently working late into the night. Additionally, he dedicated an entire week each year solely to reading.

Side note: If you're interested in identifying the most significant improvement opportunity in your life, dedicating time for enhancement, learning my top tips on effective learning, and receiving accountability support, consider exploring my Month To Master program.

In summary…

To counter the Marc Andreessen Blindspot, we must embrace five essential elements:

1. Optimism as a core value.
2. Avoid taking progress for granted.
3. Establish a new decision-making framework for improvement — The Hero’s Journey.
4. Cultivate an Improvement Mindset.
5. Implement the 5-Hour Rule for time management.

Collectively, these five pillars form a comprehensive framework for improvement, encompassing enhanced values, mindsets, decision-making, and time management. They provide a fresh operating system for living that not only fosters success and enriches our lives but also contributes to humanity. In our interconnected world, one individual's lesson can benefit us all.