Life's Equilibrium

I briefly touched on the notion of using the economic principle of equilibrium and translating it into a more relevant principle of life . The point was to take the notion, break it down and then transform it into a different faculty of life, while using the same underlying principles to create a blended understanding of it relevance outside of the economic realm.

Equilibrium Macrocosm

Let's look at things from two different lenses. The first lens can be an expansive overview of the principle and the second can be a more granular focus - both are just as important, but share a different purpose. The macrocosm is "the whole of a complex structure, especially the world or the universe, contrasted with a small or representative part of it."

Economic equilibrium is "a condition or state in which economic forces are balanced." We can look at the world and break it down into its moving parts. Take people for example, we all have necessities; food, water, shelter, sex, etc.

Supply and demand simply defines those needs for us. For example, we all need food to eat otherwise we simply cannot function, our body shuts down and we become sick. There is, and always will be, demand for food. Supply is measured slightly differently, however. We cannot assume that food will always be available and accessible. Think of vegetables that have a life cycle from seed to fruition.

The same goes for oxygen, although there is an infinite supply and demand of the resource. Comparatively, we also cannot assume that there will always be an excess amount of water even though the world is in abundance of it. Water is not always consumable and sometimes we need processes of making water consumable, such as a desalination plant.

Equilibrium Microcosm

I made reference to the microcosm of the equilibrium, discussing it as more of a principle of input, output and results in ones life. I find that using the principle in a more granular scope for our day-to-day life seems more fitting than anything else. The microcosm is "a community, place, or situation regarded as encapsulating in miniature the characteristics of something much larger." Equilibrium, however, is "a state in which opposing forces or influences are balanced."

As per my article, I was trying to measure my life in my head, factoring in every fixed and variable factor and trying to determine whether I was in a state of balance. See, like a battery we have a supply of energy, but, contrarily, we also have demand of that energy; focus, time, attention, etc. I reflect often on this notion and ask myself if I am meeting my demands, but am I also conserving my supply enough to be at my optimal level of performance.

In truth, I am always trying to find the perfect balance. I think the goal of striving for balance is the most important thing. I can't work effectively if I have high demand but no supply. There needs to be an equilibrium point where demand, supply and price meet. Just like there needs to be an equilibrium between output, input and result. The goal for me is to always be in equilibrium. This is where I will have optimal results.

Just as discipline and freedom are opposing forces that must be balanced, leadership requires finding the equilibrium in the dichotomy of many seemingly contradictory qualities between one extreme and another. - Jocko Willink

Equilibrium Extremism

It seems that although popularised through economics; the economic principle of equilibrium can be translated into every facet of our lives. Jocko Willink believers that there is always a need to balance opposing and sometimes contradictory qualities between one extreme and another.

In fairness, if you break it down to its core, the equilibrium point is simply a measure of one against another. Characteristically, does one man possess more selflessness over selfishness to lead a prosperous life? If so, how much? What is the true equilibrium in this context? Circumstantially, the equilibrium point can change, shifting the point between a range in assumption that there are times one needs to be more of one over the other.

This thought leads me to the notion that an equilibrium in life, particularly on a granular level, might look more like a range than it would so much as a point on the basis that if you are measuring two opposing characteristics, you will sometimes need to be more of one than the other, or less of the other than the first.

There is certainly no calculation for this and life probably couldn't just be measured in a range, but it does lead to some interesting though processes of opposing characteristics and our ideal equilibrium in a given scenario. In the case of everyday life, we can look at the array of emotions we express and begin to ask ourselves if we are, ourselves, in equilibrium.

Equilibrium Formulae

The measure of ones attitude and work ethic could be a great starting point in asking ourselves if we feel we are working optimally. Optimal equilibrium, in this case could be the measured by the formulae of time x output and measuring if you are effectively producing enough output in the time required in order to produce the desired results.

The answer is only one in which could be answered by the individual. Another formulae could be effectiveness x time, which simply measures your ability over a period of time and is probably more reflective of performance.

Again, one cannot really say that in measuring your own life and equilibrium requires one single formulae, but is rather indicative of what you're measuring, how it is being measured and what you hope to find in the results which could then could provide information on finding that optimal point or range of equilibrium.

Everybody is different and how we all use our time is unique to our own, but being able to express these measurements of 50-100 people spanning over various careers and verticals would produce some very interesting and useful data. We could determine who works x hours per week, how they devote their time and if they are truly finding their optimal equilibrium.

Let's create a scenario and use it as a basis.

Effectiveness x Time Formulae

When measuring effectiveness and time, we are simply looking at how a person uses their time, in what manner, and if they could be more effective with that time. Essentially, determining if they have the right methodology for their work ethic.

In this case, effectiveness would be subjective as it is dependent on the person, the line of work they are in, and the tasks they need to complete within an x period.

Assuming they worked 8 hour days, 5 x weekly = 40 hours per week.

They have 8 hours to produce x, between the range of a to b, x 5 days.

They work from 9:00am to 5:00pm, Monday to Friday.

In 8 hours, they know that of each hour, for 45 minutes they are extremely focused and for 15 minutes of that hour, they will need a coffee and toilet break = 120 minutes per day.

120 minutes = 2 hours x 5 days = 10 hours per week.

So now, before they have even begun the week, they know that their 8 hour day is now 6 hours and they have effectively lost 10 hours over the week utilising it as a break.

In a typical 40 hour week - 10 hours = 30 hours.

Again, everyone is different, but this is just a basic formulae.

Instead, let's look at the problem a little differently.

Let's assume, they work task x task.

If a task is set to take 32 hours over a 40 hour working week then effectively they will take a week + an additional day to complete the task.

For this example, let's also assume that this person does not work weekends and will not work outside of the 8 hour work window.

They have a 30 hour week, but need 32 hours to complete a task with 2 hours lost to their daily break structure.

Between 9:00am and 5:00pm, they take 8 x 15 minute breaks, effectively finishing work at 4:45pm.

What would happen if they took 30 minute breaks every 2 hours - essentially taking longer breaks but spreading it over the day.

9:00am - Start Work

10:00am-10:30am = 30 Minutes Break

12:30pm-1:00pm = 30 Minutes Break (Lunch)

3:00pm-3:30pm = 30 Minutes Break

5:00pm - End Work

In total, they took 90 minutes worth of breaks, spread more evenly throughout the day.

So instead of 8 x 15 minutes = 120 minutes per day, they took 3 x 30 minutes = 90 minutes per day.

Once losing 10 hours per week, they only lose 450 minutes = 7.5 hours per week.

This results in 30 minutes saved per day.

30 minutes x 5 days = 150 minutes = 2.5 hours.

By shifting time, their breaks and spreading it more evenly throughout the day, this person now has the ability to complete their task in 1 week, instead of 1 week + 1 day.

They once had a 30 hour week, now they have a 32.5 hour week, by adding in longer breaks.

Although seemingly taking less breaks during the day, the person is taking longer breaks, which split the day up into 3 parts instead of 8, effectively creating the illusion that they are having longer breaks, but rather shifting the equilibrium to improve their effectiveness.

Exponential Equilibrium

Essentially, everybody is trying to save time.

Everybody wants to be effective, they want to push a greater output with less input, they want to have the best results with the least effort, and sometimes it means really breaking things down. By changing a few variables and testing new systems, one can determine if they are truly being effective or if they need to measure themselves and their life to determine their own equilibrium.

Again, this can be measured against anything; time, work, business, results, goals, etc.

We sometimes need to take a step back and realise that there are always better ways of doing things. Even if we feel that our systems work, we can always find ways to refine and improve the way we do things. Small changes in input = huge changes in output and vice versa.

The goal for myself, is to always do things in the most effective way possible.

Strategically, if I can have the highest input, with the lowest energy usage, while achieving the highest output resulting in major success then I have won. This formulae is impossible to attain, however, and could only be incorporated in conjunction with day spent trying to achieve the highest input, with the highest energy usage, while achieving the highest output and resulting, again, in major success.

It is therefore fair to conclude that equilibrium in life is not a point, but rather a range - one which we flow between every single day.

Can we be our most optimal selves and perform at our highest level?

The answer is yes and always will be yes.

However, there will be days where input will shift, output will shift and usage will shift based on the externalities of life we cannot always control.

The secret in all of this is to find your range and focus on being as consistent as possible.

That will result in exponential growth over a period of time.