Most people focus on rate per unit or rate per unit time when making comparisons.
However, what truly matters is the area under the rate curve:
Rate per unit time × TimeRate per unit × Units
Why is this significant? Because when evaluating any effort, you must compare the total area, not just the peak.
The Exam Scenario.
Let me illustrate with something simple.
Goal: An exam needs 20 hours of study in 10 days.
Student A: 2 hours/day × 10 days = 20 hours → PASS
Student B: 5 hours/day × 4 days = 20 hours → PASS
Student C: 15 hours/day × 1 day = 15 hours → FAIL
Student D: 1 hour/day × 10 days = 10 hours → FAIL
Students A and B both pass—different strategies, same total area. Student C has impressive intensity but insufficient duration. Student D has admirable consistency but insufficient intensity.
The area under their curves tells the real story.
The Key Insight.
Both rate and duration are crucial for calculating the total area. Success requires a balance of consistency and intensity.
But here's what most people miss:
There are minimum thresholds for both variables. You can't compensate for falling below one threshold by exceeding the other.
Student C studying 15 hours in one day can't pass no matter how intense that day is—there's a minimum time threshold the brain needs for retention. Student D studying 1 hour daily can't pass either—there's a minimum intensity threshold below which effort doesn't accumulate meaningfully.
Understand the minimum consistency needed at maximum intensity.Understand the minimum intensity needed at maximum consistency.
Meeting minimum thresholds for both allows flexibility in approach. Falling below either threshold means failure regardless of the other variable.
Real-World Application.
Time is often the unit, with effort or skill level as the rate.
This applies everywhere:
Building a product (intensity of work × duration of development)
Learning a skill (depth of practice × consistency of practice)
Growing a relationship (quality of attention × frequency of connection)
Physical training (workout intensity × training duration)
The math is the same. The minimum thresholds vary by domain.
Know Your Profile.
If you're a high-intensity performer: Know your maximum exertion per unit time and the minimum sustainable duration. You can sprint, but for how long? And is that duration above the threshold required for success?
If you're a consistency champion: Know the minimum intensity required for success. You can show up daily, but is each session above the threshold that matters?
Most of us lean one way. The danger is assuming our natural preference will compensate for the threshold we're weak on.
Common Pitfalls.
Overestimating personal strengths. The high-intensity person thinks they can cram. The consistent person thinks showing up is enough. Both are measuring the wrong thing.
Underestimating time required for success. We calculate the area we can produce, not the area actually required. Then we're surprised when our effort doesn't yield results.
The Question.
When was the last time you applied this thinking to your life or work, before you jumped into solving something?
Before committing to a goal, ask:
What's the total area required?
What's my maximum sustainable intensity?
What's my maximum sustainable duration?
Do both exceed the minimum thresholds?
If not, either the goal needs adjusting or your approach does.
~Discovering Turiya@work@life
