Joe Redd
@joeredd.bsky.social
I talk about the Vision I’m pursuing in hopes it helps you too
Pinned
Joe Redd
@joeredd.bsky.social
· Oct 19
A friend of mine asked me to share my definition of self-actualization. Hope it inspires you. If so, lemme know!
Everyone optimizes "the breakthrough."
The real problem, though, is willingness to be in the middle without knowing when it ends. Think about it: Most growth happens in the boring parts we try to skip. So instead, enjoy the process:
Appreciate the "boring bits" for the next 24 hours.
The real problem, though, is willingness to be in the middle without knowing when it ends. Think about it: Most growth happens in the boring parts we try to skip. So instead, enjoy the process:
Appreciate the "boring bits" for the next 24 hours.
January 11, 2026 at 3:32 PM
Everyone optimizes "the breakthrough."
The real problem, though, is willingness to be in the middle without knowing when it ends. Think about it: Most growth happens in the boring parts we try to skip. So instead, enjoy the process:
Appreciate the "boring bits" for the next 24 hours.
The real problem, though, is willingness to be in the middle without knowing when it ends. Think about it: Most growth happens in the boring parts we try to skip. So instead, enjoy the process:
Appreciate the "boring bits" for the next 24 hours.
Everyone optimizes the process.
The real bottleneck is comfort with not knowing what will work until you try. For instance, the best products emerge from repeated contact with reality, not conference rooms. So remove the bottleneck:
Shorten at least 1 feedback loop today.
The real bottleneck is comfort with not knowing what will work until you try. For instance, the best products emerge from repeated contact with reality, not conference rooms. So remove the bottleneck:
Shorten at least 1 feedback loop today.
January 10, 2026 at 3:32 PM
Everyone optimizes the process.
The real bottleneck is comfort with not knowing what will work until you try. For instance, the best products emerge from repeated contact with reality, not conference rooms. So remove the bottleneck:
Shorten at least 1 feedback loop today.
The real bottleneck is comfort with not knowing what will work until you try. For instance, the best products emerge from repeated contact with reality, not conference rooms. So remove the bottleneck:
Shorten at least 1 feedback loop today.
Last's year's game to play was "worth through momentum."
It made sense to track how little time you spent in the same place. It's a trap though, because we exhaust ourselves running from self-acceptance. This year, change the game:
Ask, "what if this pause is preparing me for something?"
It made sense to track how little time you spent in the same place. It's a trap though, because we exhaust ourselves running from self-acceptance. This year, change the game:
Ask, "what if this pause is preparing me for something?"
January 4, 2026 at 3:32 PM
Last's year's game to play was "worth through momentum."
It made sense to track how little time you spent in the same place. It's a trap though, because we exhaust ourselves running from self-acceptance. This year, change the game:
Ask, "what if this pause is preparing me for something?"
It made sense to track how little time you spent in the same place. It's a trap though, because we exhaust ourselves running from self-acceptance. This year, change the game:
Ask, "what if this pause is preparing me for something?"
Last year's game to play was certainty through documentation.
What mattered was scoring how detailed your project plan looks. See it for the trap that it is. It optimizes artifacts over responsiveness.
Spring the trap: This year, track what you learned by doing, not what you predicted upfront.
What mattered was scoring how detailed your project plan looks. See it for the trap that it is. It optimizes artifacts over responsiveness.
Spring the trap: This year, track what you learned by doing, not what you predicted upfront.
January 3, 2026 at 3:32 PM
Last year's game to play was certainty through documentation.
What mattered was scoring how detailed your project plan looks. See it for the trap that it is. It optimizes artifacts over responsiveness.
Spring the trap: This year, track what you learned by doing, not what you predicted upfront.
What mattered was scoring how detailed your project plan looks. See it for the trap that it is. It optimizes artifacts over responsiveness.
Spring the trap: This year, track what you learned by doing, not what you predicted upfront.
Words triggering resistance include "stuck," "plateau," and "stagnant."
Those words give the impression that you're failing the progress narrative. So swap to "integrating," "consolidating," and "pausing." Use them to describe your current state.
Those words give the impression that you're failing the progress narrative. So swap to "integrating," "consolidating," and "pausing." Use them to describe your current state.
December 28, 2025 at 3:32 PM
Words triggering resistance include "stuck," "plateau," and "stagnant."
Those words give the impression that you're failing the progress narrative. So swap to "integrating," "consolidating," and "pausing." Use them to describe your current state.
Those words give the impression that you're failing the progress narrative. So swap to "integrating," "consolidating," and "pausing." Use them to describe your current state.
Words that trigger resistance include "ambiguous," "uncertain," and "evolving."
These words signal potential lack of rigor or control. So swap to "adaptive," "responsive," and "emergent." In particular, use them in how you frame your strategy.
These words signal potential lack of rigor or control. So swap to "adaptive," "responsive," and "emergent." In particular, use them in how you frame your strategy.
December 27, 2025 at 3:32 PM
Words that trigger resistance include "ambiguous," "uncertain," and "evolving."
These words signal potential lack of rigor or control. So swap to "adaptive," "responsive," and "emergent." In particular, use them in how you frame your strategy.
These words signal potential lack of rigor or control. So swap to "adaptive," "responsive," and "emergent." In particular, use them in how you frame your strategy.
It's vulnerable to admit when you're not moving.
Because it activates a fear of losing the story that you're always improving. Self-acceptance threatens that narrative. It suggests you might be okay as-is.
Know your "enough" and when you're "enough"—and be just fine with that.
Because it activates a fear of losing the story that you're always improving. Self-acceptance threatens that narrative. It suggests you might be okay as-is.
Know your "enough" and when you're "enough"—and be just fine with that.
December 21, 2025 at 3:32 PM
It's vulnerable to admit when you're not moving.
Because it activates a fear of losing the story that you're always improving. Self-acceptance threatens that narrative. It suggests you might be okay as-is.
Know your "enough" and when you're "enough"—and be just fine with that.
Because it activates a fear of losing the story that you're always improving. Self-acceptance threatens that narrative. It suggests you might be okay as-is.
Know your "enough" and when you're "enough"—and be just fine with that.
Teams that navigate messy human systems hold real risk.
It's risky giving up the illusion that 5-year plans mean something. Makes sense. It proves most value comes from real-time adaptation.
Regardless, replace your roadmap with probe-sense-respond cycles—it's worth the risk!
It's risky giving up the illusion that 5-year plans mean something. Makes sense. It proves most value comes from real-time adaptation.
Regardless, replace your roadmap with probe-sense-respond cycles—it's worth the risk!
December 20, 2025 at 3:32 PM
Teams that navigate messy human systems hold real risk.
It's risky giving up the illusion that 5-year plans mean something. Makes sense. It proves most value comes from real-time adaptation.
Regardless, replace your roadmap with probe-sense-respond cycles—it's worth the risk!
It's risky giving up the illusion that 5-year plans mean something. Makes sense. It proves most value comes from real-time adaptation.
Regardless, replace your roadmap with probe-sense-respond cycles—it's worth the risk!
People think we chase perfection because we're ambitious.
It's like if we accept what is, we'll stay stuck forever. Temporary defeat ≠ rejection. It's just a pause in your momentum.
Allow yourself to be stuck today without a plan to escape it. Enjoy the view from there and see where it takes you.
It's like if we accept what is, we'll stay stuck forever. Temporary defeat ≠ rejection. It's just a pause in your momentum.
Allow yourself to be stuck today without a plan to escape it. Enjoy the view from there and see where it takes you.
December 14, 2025 at 3:32 PM
People think we chase perfection because we're ambitious.
It's like if we accept what is, we'll stay stuck forever. Temporary defeat ≠ rejection. It's just a pause in your momentum.
Allow yourself to be stuck today without a plan to escape it. Enjoy the view from there and see where it takes you.
It's like if we accept what is, we'll stay stuck forever. Temporary defeat ≠ rejection. It's just a pause in your momentum.
Allow yourself to be stuck today without a plan to escape it. Enjoy the view from there and see where it takes you.
People think we overcomplicate because we're thorough.
The real driver is fear that if we can't predict outcomes, we're not really leading. Which I get. But uncertainty ≠ incompetence.
So go with the flow: Make a decision today based on patterns, not protocols.
The real driver is fear that if we can't predict outcomes, we're not really leading. Which I get. But uncertainty ≠ incompetence.
So go with the flow: Make a decision today based on patterns, not protocols.
December 13, 2025 at 3:32 PM
People think we overcomplicate because we're thorough.
The real driver is fear that if we can't predict outcomes, we're not really leading. Which I get. But uncertainty ≠ incompetence.
So go with the flow: Make a decision today based on patterns, not protocols.
The real driver is fear that if we can't predict outcomes, we're not really leading. Which I get. But uncertainty ≠ incompetence.
So go with the flow: Make a decision today based on patterns, not protocols.
Myth: Progress requires constant forward motion.
Reality: Sometimes you need to stop thrashing to see the way forward. Yet the myth survives because stillness feels like failure in productivity culture. Try this instead:
This week, merely describe where you are, without judgment, with gratitude.
Reality: Sometimes you need to stop thrashing to see the way forward. Yet the myth survives because stillness feels like failure in productivity culture. Try this instead:
This week, merely describe where you are, without judgment, with gratitude.
December 7, 2025 at 3:32 PM
Myth: Progress requires constant forward motion.
Reality: Sometimes you need to stop thrashing to see the way forward. Yet the myth survives because stillness feels like failure in productivity culture. Try this instead:
This week, merely describe where you are, without judgment, with gratitude.
Reality: Sometimes you need to stop thrashing to see the way forward. Yet the myth survives because stillness feels like failure in productivity culture. Try this instead:
This week, merely describe where you are, without judgment, with gratitude.
Myth: Complex environments need more control.
Reality: They need more sensing, less forcing. The myth survives thought because command-and-control feels like leadership. Try this instead:
Watch what's already working in your system for a bit before intervening right away.
Reality: They need more sensing, less forcing. The myth survives thought because command-and-control feels like leadership. Try this instead:
Watch what's already working in your system for a bit before intervening right away.
December 6, 2025 at 3:32 PM
Myth: Complex environments need more control.
Reality: They need more sensing, less forcing. The myth survives thought because command-and-control feels like leadership. Try this instead:
Watch what's already working in your system for a bit before intervening right away.
Reality: They need more sensing, less forcing. The myth survives thought because command-and-control feels like leadership. Try this instead:
Watch what's already working in your system for a bit before intervening right away.
You presume that utilities scale with your ambition.
The cost? You build on sand when regions face water bankruptcy and forced relocation. Fix the false presumption with a question:
"Water is a load-bearing assumption, so what's our plan if regional water access changes?"
The cost? You build on sand when regions face water bankruptcy and forced relocation. Fix the false presumption with a question:
"Water is a load-bearing assumption, so what's our plan if regional water access changes?"
December 2, 2025 at 12:08 AM
You presume that utilities scale with your ambition.
The cost? You build on sand when regions face water bankruptcy and forced relocation. Fix the false presumption with a question:
"Water is a load-bearing assumption, so what's our plan if regional water access changes?"
The cost? You build on sand when regions face water bankruptcy and forced relocation. Fix the false presumption with a question:
"Water is a load-bearing assumption, so what's our plan if regional water access changes?"
AI founders ignore water because it's invisible until catastrophic.
That's too bad, because your competitors who built water resilience into their model early benefit. When operations halt and investors ask why, you'll only have yourself to blame. Pivot:
Start by reading a water stress forecast.
That's too bad, because your competitors who built water resilience into their model early benefit. When operations halt and investors ask why, you'll only have yourself to blame. Pivot:
Start by reading a water stress forecast.
December 1, 2025 at 8:08 PM
AI founders ignore water because it's invisible until catastrophic.
That's too bad, because your competitors who built water resilience into their model early benefit. When operations halt and investors ask why, you'll only have yourself to blame. Pivot:
Start by reading a water stress forecast.
That's too bad, because your competitors who built water resilience into their model early benefit. When operations halt and investors ask why, you'll only have yourself to blame. Pivot:
Start by reading a water stress forecast.
All companies optimize product-market fit.
Far too few embrace resource-reality fit. For instance, entire factories shut down during water shortages while some startups wonder why supply chains broke. Remove this bottleneck:
Add "water availability" to your site selection criteria.
Far too few embrace resource-reality fit. For instance, entire factories shut down during water shortages while some startups wonder why supply chains broke. Remove this bottleneck:
Add "water availability" to your site selection criteria.
December 1, 2025 at 6:08 PM
All companies optimize product-market fit.
Far too few embrace resource-reality fit. For instance, entire factories shut down during water shortages while some startups wonder why supply chains broke. Remove this bottleneck:
Add "water availability" to your site selection criteria.
Far too few embrace resource-reality fit. For instance, entire factories shut down during water shortages while some startups wonder why supply chains broke. Remove this bottleneck:
Add "water availability" to your site selection criteria.
The business game still being played these days is ignoring externalities to hit milestones.
We score how fast AI scales before reality hits. How? By treating water like bandwidth...infinite until it isn't. Stop taking water for granted:
Hire someone who knows water law.
We score how fast AI scales before reality hits. How? By treating water like bandwidth...infinite until it isn't. Stop taking water for granted:
Hire someone who knows water law.
December 1, 2025 at 4:08 PM
The business game still being played these days is ignoring externalities to hit milestones.
We score how fast AI scales before reality hits. How? By treating water like bandwidth...infinite until it isn't. Stop taking water for granted:
Hire someone who knows water law.
We score how fast AI scales before reality hits. How? By treating water like bandwidth...infinite until it isn't. Stop taking water for granted:
Hire someone who knows water law.
Words triggering resistance: "water scarcity," "water rationing," and "limits." Those words signal AI anti-growth pessimism.
Swap to: "Resilience planning," "resource intelligence," and "adaptive capacity." Use them in your next board deck.
Swap to: "Resilience planning," "resource intelligence," and "adaptive capacity." Use them in your next board deck.
December 1, 2025 at 1:08 PM
Words triggering resistance: "water scarcity," "water rationing," and "limits." Those words signal AI anti-growth pessimism.
Swap to: "Resilience planning," "resource intelligence," and "adaptive capacity." Use them in your next board deck.
Swap to: "Resilience planning," "resource intelligence," and "adaptive capacity." Use them in your next board deck.
I've realized that I've been solving for stuck-ness by adding more action.
I'd forgotten that movement returns when I stop forcing it. But I kept pushing because I thought part of letting go = giving things up.
Today, I'll niks for 5 minutes without fixing anything; help the brain realign.
I'd forgotten that movement returns when I stop forcing it. But I kept pushing because I thought part of letting go = giving things up.
Today, I'll niks for 5 minutes without fixing anything; help the brain realign.
November 30, 2025 at 3:32 PM
I've realized that I've been solving for stuck-ness by adding more action.
I'd forgotten that movement returns when I stop forcing it. But I kept pushing because I thought part of letting go = giving things up.
Today, I'll niks for 5 minutes without fixing anything; help the brain realign.
I'd forgotten that movement returns when I stop forcing it. But I kept pushing because I thought part of letting go = giving things up.
Today, I'll niks for 5 minutes without fixing anything; help the brain realign.
I keep seeing folks apply linear solutions to adaptive challenges.
As a consequence, they miss leverage points only revealed through interaction. Yet we keep doing it because we think complex = complicated. So let's reframe:
Run small experiments and iterate rather than running one big plan.
As a consequence, they miss leverage points only revealed through interaction. Yet we keep doing it because we think complex = complicated. So let's reframe:
Run small experiments and iterate rather than running one big plan.
November 29, 2025 at 3:32 PM
I keep seeing folks apply linear solutions to adaptive challenges.
As a consequence, they miss leverage points only revealed through interaction. Yet we keep doing it because we think complex = complicated. So let's reframe:
Run small experiments and iterate rather than running one big plan.
As a consequence, they miss leverage points only revealed through interaction. Yet we keep doing it because we think complex = complicated. So let's reframe:
Run small experiments and iterate rather than running one big plan.
We say, "I need to get unstuck."
Sometimes that means, "I'm not allowed to be here, feeling this." That mismatch creates resistance loops. Embrace your self; replace it with "I'm exactly where I am."
Then name 1 feeling you've been fighting today.
Sometimes that means, "I'm not allowed to be here, feeling this." That mismatch creates resistance loops. Embrace your self; replace it with "I'm exactly where I am."
Then name 1 feeling you've been fighting today.
November 23, 2025 at 3:32 PM
We say, "I need to get unstuck."
Sometimes that means, "I'm not allowed to be here, feeling this." That mismatch creates resistance loops. Embrace your self; replace it with "I'm exactly where I am."
Then name 1 feeling you've been fighting today.
Sometimes that means, "I'm not allowed to be here, feeling this." That mismatch creates resistance loops. Embrace your self; replace it with "I'm exactly where I am."
Then name 1 feeling you've been fighting today.
When we create in complex environments, we say, "Let's simplify this."
But what we often mean is, "I need predictable cause and effect." That mismatch creates untenable ideas. So instead say, "Let's navigate emergence."
That way, you identify dynamic relationships in your systems and teams.
But what we often mean is, "I need predictable cause and effect." That mismatch creates untenable ideas. So instead say, "Let's navigate emergence."
That way, you identify dynamic relationships in your systems and teams.
November 22, 2025 at 3:32 PM
When we create in complex environments, we say, "Let's simplify this."
But what we often mean is, "I need predictable cause and effect." That mismatch creates untenable ideas. So instead say, "Let's navigate emergence."
That way, you identify dynamic relationships in your systems and teams.
But what we often mean is, "I need predictable cause and effect." That mismatch creates untenable ideas. So instead say, "Let's navigate emergence."
That way, you identify dynamic relationships in your systems and teams.
The Default: Manage your image so no one sees you struggling.
The Cost: Trust requires letting people witness your real process, gaps included.
Swap-In Default: "I'm figuring this out, here's where I am. And even then, I'm not sure yet—so let's explore it together."
The Cost: Trust requires letting people witness your real process, gaps included.
Swap-In Default: "I'm figuring this out, here's where I am. And even then, I'm not sure yet—so let's explore it together."
November 22, 2025 at 12:08 AM
The Default: Manage your image so no one sees you struggling.
The Cost: Trust requires letting people witness your real process, gaps included.
Swap-In Default: "I'm figuring this out, here's where I am. And even then, I'm not sure yet—so let's explore it together."
The Cost: Trust requires letting people witness your real process, gaps included.
Swap-In Default: "I'm figuring this out, here's where I am. And even then, I'm not sure yet—so let's explore it together."
Impostor syndrome is rooted in perform competence rather than building it with people.
Only perfectionists would rather hide than be helped. And that benefits no one; working relationships stay transactional. Go new school:
Today, ask a human (not AI or the Internet) for help with something.
Only perfectionists would rather hide than be helped. And that benefits no one; working relationships stay transactional. Go new school:
Today, ask a human (not AI or the Internet) for help with something.
November 21, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Impostor syndrome is rooted in perform competence rather than building it with people.
Only perfectionists would rather hide than be helped. And that benefits no one; working relationships stay transactional. Go new school:
Today, ask a human (not AI or the Internet) for help with something.
Only perfectionists would rather hide than be helped. And that benefits no one; working relationships stay transactional. Go new school:
Today, ask a human (not AI or the Internet) for help with something.