The McDonald's Theory of Bad Ideas

https://medium.com/what-i-learned-building/9216e1c9da7d

by drx • 13 years ago

442 135 13 years ago

I've had two different experiences like this. The first is a co-worker that did a different tactic. When someone would ask him if he wanted to get lunch and no idea of where to go, he would ask "rice or noodle?" This somehow always lead us going to a place that had neither of those things.

From what I've seen, the inverse of this seems to also imply where a group will end up going for lunch. I've had co-workers say Costco or Taco Bell "isn't lunch". Because of those negative statements, that is exactly where the group ends up going.

obviouslygreen• 13 years ago

The problem I have with this starts as soon as the author insists that the second step is "always" easier than the first, and implicates that first step as somehow being a time sink.

As soon add you say "always" you are almost certainly wrong, and you have most likely missed something important, or at least relevant. This article dismisses a huge breadth of ideas and processes simply because sometimes it is effective to skip them.

r00fus2• 13 years ago

so s/always/often/ the fact remains that the first step is often the most difficult.

It's a pattern - applicable to any "analysis paralysis" scenario - break the ice by suggesting a lowest-common-denominator (bad) suggestion, and let others be the "winners" by suggesting "acceptable" choices.

By suggesting the unseemly, you actually end up doing the graceful thing.

brucehart• 13 years ago

I use a technique like this when I am stuck trying to write code and can't figure out how to do it efficiently. I ask myself "what is the worst possible way to implement this function?" and start writing that. Sure enough, that gets my mind going almost immediately and I start thinking of the improvements needed to turn it into good code.

Xcelerate• 13 years ago

Haha, I know that feeling. "How on earth am I supposed to implement this?" usually turns into:

    for (int i = 0; i < alpha; ++i) {
        for (int j = 0; j < beta; ++j) {
            for (int k = 0; k < gamma; ++k) {
                ...

Twisol• 13 years ago

I do this too, except I call it a "rope bridge". Write the simplest thing possible, even if it doesn't do everything you need, and then start iterating. The rope bridge will quickly become much more solid.

The danger is that you leave the solution at too early a stage, and other things start relying on your flimsy rope bridge. It gets really difficult to go back and do things better.

GhotiFish2• 13 years ago

That's test driven development sans the testing.

You should try test driven development :)

modarts2• 13 years ago

TDD?

mjcohen3• 13 years ago

Test driven development.

As opposed to TTD, which is test to destruction.

Or DDT, which is development driven testing.

Or DMD, which is don't mean diddly.

arethuza• 13 years ago

More Extreme Programming:

http://c2.com/xp/DoTheSimplestThingThatCouldPossiblyWork.htm...

brianpan• 13 years ago

This is what's really happening with the McDonald's theory- it's a resetting of expectations by asking a different question. We can't ever figure out lunch because we're thinking "What would I really like to eat today?" and too often the answer is nothing. But if the question is, "What is better than McDonalds?" you might have some ideas. Even if you like McDonalds, this question is more concrete and answerable.

girvo• 13 years ago

Unfortunately, due to doing PHP professionally in a horrible legacy codebase, the answer is usually "Doing it at all". Sigh.

calinet62• 13 years ago

Excellent concept, and it works great.

Often you overcomplicate implementation by thinking about the right way from the start, and while this is a good thing to do in general, sometimes it gets in your way. I like to think of the simplest possible way to write it (not necessarily the "worst" but just the simplest). Then you have something, anything at all, and you can go from there.

My ex-coworker always said "Make it work, then make it good, then make it fast." Good rule of thumb that has taken me pretty far in code productivity.

flatline2• 13 years ago

Of course, there is the risk that everyone thinks McDonalds is a swell idea, and then no one will ever do anything nicer for lunch ever again. Not to stretch the analogy too far, but I have had this happen both literally and figuratively.

vacri• 13 years ago

If it backfires, then all you need to do is next time say "let's do something different".

flatline2• 13 years ago

Once a precedent has been established, it can be hard to change people's minds, especially if it was fast/easy/convenient the first time around. It really depends on the group.

ffn• 13 years ago

As the guys who usual says "that's a swell idea", or "yeah, I'm down for some McNuggets" to really gross food decisions (masochism, I don't know), I personally love it when other folks throw out these "sequestration" choices because it's usually the only way to get everyone to go to McDonalds.

mbetter• 13 years ago

I actually could go for some McNuggets right now.

ripter3• 13 years ago

And that's how I discovered the McRib

modarts2• 13 years ago

Exactly. I can't even begin to tell you how many times something that was supposed to be "just be a prototype" made it to production this same way.

weinzierl• 13 years ago

You bet. I'm working on an application that is a prototype and a legacy application simultaneously.

rmc• 13 years ago

There's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution.

ripter3• 13 years ago

I've wondered if there is any production software that wasn't "just a prototype"

alxp• 13 years ago

There's a fable warning about the problem of throwing out a suggestion because you think one needs to be made, and then everyone going along with it because it's what they think the group wants, when no individual actually wants to do that thing. It's called the Abilene Paradox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abilene_paradox

incompatible2• 13 years ago

Wikipedia is actually a great example of how getting something started can eventually lead to something much better. Here's the first version of that article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abilene_paradox...

That's what Wikipedia was like after it was created: random people writing a few words about some subject they thought they knew something about. It didn't seem like it would amount to much, at the time.

mseebach• 13 years ago

If everybody (but you, presumably) is happy with McDonald's then the onus is on you to change their minds. The trick only works when there is a consensus to strive higher. If you fail to do that, then, eventually, you will have to say "screw you guys, I'll go to the ramen-place alone then".

aflinik• 13 years ago

If you had a better idea you should have started with it in the first place.

It should work equally well as a creativity trigger, and if nobody comes up with something different you still end up with a choice that's not so bad.

run4yourlives2• 13 years ago

If everyone thinks McDonald's is a swell idea, it probably is.

This means that either A) Lunch isn't as important as everyone seems to make it out to be , or B) McDonald's is "good enough" or C) some combination of factors including A and B that suggest worrying about where you are eating for lunch isn't worth any of your time today.

melling• 13 years ago

Isn't this just a "straw man concept?" Just throw out some idea, even it it's bad just to get the conversation going?

stephengillie• 13 years ago

It is very much a "straw man" argument -- the straw man being that the first suggestion has to be terrible. I've used this strategy many times, but instead I'll make an actual suggestion, like a more popular burger chain, or a sandwich chain.

bravura• 13 years ago

Related hack:

When you can't make progress and choose between two comparable options, Dan Ariely (behavioral economist) recommends you flip a coin. As you flip it, the impact of a potential decision might prompt you to realize the outcome you truly want.

However, there is a caveat: "The coin trick is indeed only useful for cases where the two options are of the same type (two cameras, two movies, etc). In your example, one option is more tempting in the short term (chocolate cake) while the other is better in the long term (fruit). In such cases we should not trust our gut feelings to drive us to the best decisions."

http://danariely.com/2013/01/05/ask-ariely-on-stretching-tim...

riffic• 13 years ago

This is the Arnold Rothstein method of decision making, as seen on Boardwalk Empire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...

mjcohen3• 13 years ago

Piet Hein wrote a grook about this. It essentially says "don't look at what the coin flip says; look at how you feel about the result of the flip."

Aqueous• 13 years ago

The theory is correct, and I applaud the author for willing to be that guy, because if you do this too often you become the person who always has the worst idea.

r00fus2• 13 years ago

And yet if the outing is good, the "worst idea guy" is always invited. Results matter.

digz• 13 years ago

This was also the idea behind the sequester... somehow good ideas aren't exactly flowing.

DigitalSea2• 13 years ago

I get the theory behind recommending the worse idea so that people recommend something that isn't nearly as bad but what is so bad about McDonald's? Here in Australia there aren't many fast food establishments opened at 3am besides McDonald's and when you're driving to work or had a night out on the town which is worse: dodgy kebab, slightly warm 3 day old curry or McDonald's?

I tend to use a similar tactic when we're brainstorming internal project ideas especially. I'll come up with something really stupid to break the ice and then others feel better knowing their ideas probably aren't nearly as bad.

pantaloons• 13 years ago

The use of McDonalds as idiomatic low quality trash is questionable too, I've found McDonalds in Australia and New Zealand is significantly higher quality than in the US. While it's still not a luxury brand by any means the restaurants do have a much more sophisticated atmosphere.

saraid216• 13 years ago

I suspect there's a fairly high variance within the US, too. I've never had a crappy McDonald's food, but I'm usually in an upper middle class suburb or downtown Seattle when I go.

alwaysinshade• 13 years ago

> what is so bad about McDonald's? Here in Australia [...]

McDonald's Australia has excellent QA, process management and supply chain. I received some insight through someone...involved in all that good stuff (my background is QA/Environment so I get to meet some interesting people from various industries).

Coworkers from the US all tend to say the same thing after going to an AU McDonald's - great burgers but ~3x the price. It's a different beast in the US where quantity trumps quality.

DigitalSea2• 13 years ago

Very well put. I can't speak for US McDonald's but Australian McDonald's where I worked in my youth for a bit had very strict QA processes. The store I worked at was in a low income area, but it was kept spotless, food was kept for the minimum amount of time (maximum 10 minutes for fries I think), burgers made to order.

arrrg• 13 years ago

McDonald's in Germany most certainly also. Fresh ingredients, clean restaurants, ...

What this doesn't change, though, is that their food (fries excepted) tastes like total shit. And their burgers taste like nothing. But it does so consistently.

I'm sorry, but my bad opinion of McDonald's is not based on the quality of their ingredients or their quality. It's based on taste.

philwelch2• 13 years ago

It's a local thing. Australian McDonalds might actually be OK. But it's also a question of alternatives, and in most cities (not suburbs) at lunchtime near where people work, there are a plethora of better options than McDonalds.

mwfunk• 13 years ago

I am much more likely to be frustrated by really having a hankering for some McDonald's and everyone else being the sort of people who haven't had fast food in 10 years, if ever in their entire life (pretty much my entire team). I try to appreciate both the finer and coarser things in life.

pfitzsimmons• 13 years ago

A related trick to avoid procrastination: I have often found myself procrastinating when needing to send an important, but non-urgent, email. Procrastination is often a result of fear. I realized that the procrastination came from a fear that I would phrase the email wrong, or get the tone wrong, and blow my chance at getting a favorable response. To avoid procrastination, I find it helpful to tell myself, "ok, I will just compose the email right now, that is all, and I can send it whenever I want tomorrow, the next day, no hurry." Of course, after composing the email, I almost always get over the fear and just end up sending it.

Apocryphon• 13 years ago

That is an excellent productivity tip that can be applied to anything. I think what helps, especially for hackers, is to think of activities as a series of simulations before the actual action. There is less pressure when you were on sims, or drafts, or prototypes of the real thing. Such things can fail with far less consequences. So I guess rapid prototyping is one cure for procrastination.

Guthur• 13 years ago

My take on this is that it is effective because it reduces peoples fear of suggesting an idea.

We all feel something for our own genuine suggestions, a sort of ownership, and so fear the possibility of rejection as it would be a rejection of something personal to us, our preference.

When someone suggests a universally and whole heartily rejected idea we can take a degree of security from that that our idea will not be as universally disliked; "Well it's not as bad as McDonald's"

It's also possible that it just gets the "flow" going, which again is more to do with removing peoples fears i.e. "well, he suggested an idea and it wasn't so bad for him so I may as well suggest one as well"

incision3• 13 years ago

I don't see this as a creative concern.

Does anyone really think this group of coworkers, which almost surely eats something, somewhere eat day needs "inspiration" that they are truly bereft of ideas when this happens?

I don't.

They aren't out of ideas, they're avoiding blame - the inevitable bitching, disagreement or silent resentment that comes with making a choice.

It's the same blame culture that screws up any number of workplaces only worse as there may be nothing so pressing and universally felt as something like the human need for sustenance.

Projects are put off for days, weeks or years and they aren't universally felt when they remain undone. Individuals can't necessarily act to satiate themselves either, that could make them "cowboys".

In the original analogy, silence is complacency, the stream of ideas is a reactive response and the question should really be about how to eliminate the blame culture and replace it with something proactive and productive.

ripter3• 13 years ago

Having been in this same situation at work and at home, I have to disagree with you.

We go out to lunch several times a week, and unless someone is craving something, it almost always comes down to this. We use Subway instead of McDonalds, but the result is the same.

There is no blame, we honestly can't think of where to eat until some idea is thrown out there. Then all of a sudden we remember that mexican place in the park, or the new burger joint that opened up a few weeks ago. We throw out suggestions and if we all agree, then we go. It just takes a little push to get the ball rolling.

incision3• 13 years ago

Seems a bit much you all should consistently be unable to "think of where to eat" when the question is asked "several times a week".

Does this pervasive forgetfulness show up everywhere in your lives?

If so, you guys should probably be mulling over doctors, not lunch. If not, you might want to reconsider what I've suggested and why you so consistently "forget" in socially arbitrated situations.

austenallred• 13 years ago

I like to think of brainstorming as a conveyer belt full of bad and good ideas. If you stop at the bad ones you don't let the good ones through either. You can't help what's on the belt, you just have to let it run.

Don't stop the conveyor belt.

programminggeek• 13 years ago

I throw out ridiculous ideas all the time, but the thing is, a lot of the time they are only slightly exaggerated. A lot of times a truly bad idea has some good idea hidden just beneath the surface.

yoster5• 13 years ago

I happen to like McDonald's every once in a while.

mynameishere• 13 years ago

There are a few items on the menu specifically aimed at adults who would be otherwise reluctant to bring their children.

yoster5• 13 years ago

Children do love their happy meals though. There wouldn't be a plethora of these fast food places all over the world if the vast majority of people didn't like McDonald's. It isn't healthy to eat at everyday, but every once in a while is fine.

nilkn• 13 years ago

McDonald's may not be healthy, but I've never had anything from one that was gross.

(As an aside, many restaurants aren't necessarily any healthier than fast food.)

pieguy• 13 years ago

Congress tried this...and we got the sequester.

Dove• 13 years ago

My coworkers used to call these "straw horses". Like straw men, but attacking them is supposed to take you somewhere.

SagelyGuru• 13 years ago

This is a well known psychological effect. The "powers that be" use it all the time to force their will on an initially resisting population. They first propose an obviously draconian and unfair legislation, which is then, after a public outcry, mellowed down to the originally intended form. Hey presto, everyone is now happy about "the concessions and safeguards", forgetting that in the process they got something that they never wanted in the first place.

Flenser• 13 years ago

You're describing the overton window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

dankoss• 13 years ago

In sales this is known as the anchoring effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring

khill• 13 years ago

AKA "Ask for the pony to get the dog".

gertef3• 13 years ago

That's called compromise.

mpweiher• 13 years ago

Sort of like the interrogation technique demonstrated by the new "Sherlock": instead of asking questions that your opposite doesn't want to answer, make (false) assertions that they will want to disprove.

Seemed very plausible to me.

shinykitten• 13 years ago

> people are inspired to come up with good ideas to ward off bad ones.

Interesting theory, but I think something else is happening here.

If you have a bunch of people trying to solve a problem, the game is implicitly defined as "propose the best solution." After the first proposal, the game changes to "improve on the best solution so far."

This is something to keep in mind during interviews [1] for people on both sides of the table. If a candidate is silent for too long, propose a bad idea and ask them to improve on it. That gets them talking out loud, and you get more info to go on. If you're a candidate, you can start with a bad (yet probably obvious) solution and explain why it's bad. In the process of talking it through, you'll likely think of a better solution.

[1] The algorithm/coding one-big-question-over-45-minutes style of interviews commonly conducted by large software companies.

danielweber• 13 years ago

NASA has spaceflight designs, and there are a lot of variables at play, so you can never really find "the best" mission.

So they create a reference mission, and then compare candidates to that. Something doesn't have to be strictly better (if there were something strictly better they probably would have found it), but you then understand the trade-offs you are making from it.

babuskov• 13 years ago

+1. I think the same. People, esp. smart people judge their ideas as not so good, and won't even mention it. When you bring up McDonalds, the person suddenly thinks: Hey, I didn't know the bar was that low.

jawr• 13 years ago

Surely everything after is considered a good idea, because the it was bad; even if suggestions were repeated prior and post suggesting mc donalds, that suggestion is suddenly considered a better idea...

iMark• 13 years ago

I've worked on too many projects where I've received a spec and concluded that only a room full of people arguing without reaching agreement could have produced something so bad.

lhnz• 13 years ago

This is because the only thing worse than being a leader, is having bad leadership.

bwang8• 13 years ago

If you are working by yourself, this trick only works sometimes. If you have extreme apathy against your subject matter or absolutely no idea on what you should do, then putting down a bad idea would just result in a bad idea written down, and there is nothing that follows. I only experience partial success with this technique (in cases, where I have some idea on what I am doing, but I am just debating internally about minor details).

rjknight• 13 years ago

This reminds me of a very similar idea from Scott Adams (creator of Dilbert): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870329320457610...

Quote: I spent some time working in the television industry, and I learned a technique that writers use. It's called "the bad version." When you feel that a plot solution exists, but you can't yet imagine it, you describe instead a bad version that has no purpose other than stimulating the other writers to imagine a better version.

sjtgraham• 13 years ago

I happen to like McDonald's.

tams• 13 years ago

I always thought starting a discussion with a deliberately bad plan works because people always excel at criticizing existing ideas, but coming up with something new is harder. Creative discussion naturally emerges when there is something that can be improved upon.

nshepperd• 13 years ago

Perhaps throwing out a bad idea like McDonalds just lowers the bar so that the others don't have to worry about being looked down upon for having a bad suggestion. No-one wants to be the guy who says "I really like X" while everyone else thinks "X? How low-status."

arbuge• 13 years ago

It certainly is easier to edit than create. You need at least one "creator" on a team with the initiative to get things going when they're stuck. After that, good "editors" can make for pretty effective team players also.

ps. This article hurt my feelings as an MCD stockholder. :)

prawks• 13 years ago

I like the article for it's "get started rather than waiting for the perfect solution". However the McDonald's example makes the author sound like he's advocating proposing bad ideas. It's probably best if you don't present ideas that are intentionally awful (like his McDonald's recommendation). You'd just be sabotaging your reputation (you're now "that guy with all the bad ideas").

Get to work and don't be afraid to propose ideas you have.

jonb4• 13 years ago

I wrote "here's a way to be less scared".

And you're saying "just don't be scared".

(shrug)

bestest• 13 years ago

I tried that with my girlfriend. Doesn't work. We always dine at McDonald's now.

peterwwillis• 13 years ago

Article doesn't work in Opera Mini =(

marknutter• 13 years ago

I like McDonald's. It's cheap, consistent, and fast. I don't need to be a foodie for every damn lunch I have.

papsosouid• 13 years ago

Maybe it is just Canada, but I have been lucky to get 1/3 of those qualities from McDonald's lately. A big mac (just the sandwich, nothing else) is $5, and isn't very filling. Every other fast food place around here is just as cheap or cheaper, and very few are as low quality and inconsistent.

It is hard to consider McDonald's the "cheap option" when a big mac and fries is $8, but a gyro and fries that taste way better, and are ~30% more food is $5 at the place across the street. McDonald's is actually the second most expensive fast food option I've found, only being cheaper than Mucho Burrito (which is far better food).

VLM2• 13 years ago

There's never really anything new in IT. Looking at past revolutions of the eternal IT wheel the next article will be about Fred Brook's "second system effect" where a simple 1st choice like McDonalds for lunch inevitably leads to a ridiculously overengineered second solution in reaction, like a $300/plate steakhouse or perhaps a strange ethnic restaurant for lunch 90 miles away.

This article is basically a rehash of Fred Brooks "pilot system" concept where regardless of if they admit it or not, the first system design will be a throwaway which the team uses to gel their ideas around. Often the second system ends up like the above paragraph.

As far as I know Brooks was the first turn of this eternal IT wheel, and he wrote this in the mid 70s about his experiences in the 60s. I'm still young enough that I suspect most of what Brooks invented in the 70s will be rediscovered many more times before I retire. As far as I know Brooks was not rehashing someone previous to him, I'd be interested to learn if anyone has older references.

Its still a reasonably well written article, even if there's nothing new in it. Brooks's original writing is also pretty good, if you want to see the future of software development, what will be claimed to be "invented" over and over in future decades, you could do worse than "the mythical man month". The re-release is better than the original but not immensely so, so don't freak if your local library only has the first edition.

specialist• 13 years ago

I read the article differently. The OP is suggesting failing faster by starting with an idea, any idea, just to get moving.

I've done something similar.

I was a new minted engineering manager. We had lotsa grumpy gate keepers. Domain experts who would withhold information, but happy to snipe later on.

So when it wasn't clear (to my immediate team) what to do, I'd add something really stupid, but plausible, to the requirements. Then claim the document was being sent to our dealer channel.

Oh boy! Then I'd get the feedback I needed.

jk4930• 13 years ago

Sounds similar to the "duck technique", even if the provoked reactions rely on different motivations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_trivialit...

VLM2• 13 years ago

Your description of Brooks's "pilot system" is better than my own, although longer.

dkrich• 13 years ago

This is really the availability heuristic (basically that the information that is most readily available seems most accurate or likely to be true).

When smart people explain complex subjects clearly and confidently we have the tendency to say "oh yeah, that makes a lot of sense." In reality nothing is always true but that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't good to fool ourselves into thinking so. In fact it's probably how progress is made. If people knew how hard most things were going to be at the outset, they'd never start and look for something easier to do.

Sakes• 13 years ago

Maybe the concept is not new, but the example he uses is brilliant. Everybody eats, everybody has at one point or another tried to democratically decide where to eat, and everyone that likes food dislikes/hates McDonalds. The article is funny, it anchors the idea to a global brand, and so it will be easy to remember for anyone who reads it.

I feel as if you read this as simply a rehash of known techniques, and what I saw was a light hearted/entertaining story, that anyone can relate to and take value from.

gxs• 13 years ago

Where would you recommend one look for a collection of this wisdom? Brooks is one example, what are others? Where would one look to find a cannon of this type of thing?

DenisM• 13 years ago

The mythical man-month is one, and peopleware is another, then there is innovators dilemma. These three cover it all pretty well.

calinet62• 13 years ago

Fantastic article. Love the Ann Lamott reference; read her book "Bird by Bird," from which the quote came; it really is great. Reading more into this article than "start with something and go from there" is reading too much.

jonb4• 13 years ago

touches nose

slinkyavenger• 13 years ago

The rest of his staff will one day refer to him as "that guy who really seems to like McDonalds"

john_p• 13 years ago

Nice article. One factor that seems to overlook is the cost of an early decision that becomes impossible to change as the project matures as I descibe here: http://www.codingismycraft.com/2013/05/01/be-extra-cautious-...

ericmoritz• 13 years ago

Works until you're forced to build a PHP site with GDBM as a backend because everyone but you thought it was a good idea.

kimandre• 13 years ago

I've done this online for a long time. I.e you start a forum thread but dont get any replies. Make a 2nd account replying a silly answer that is wrong - experts suddenly appear.

therandomguy• 13 years ago

How bad is eating at McDonald's for you? If you just get a BigMac and diet coke, is it all that worse than any other food establishment?

gertef3• 13 years ago

http://24sevenpost.com/cuisine/mcdonalds-subway-menu-nutriti...

yoster5• 13 years ago

You could also compare a McDonald's salad with a Subway sandwich.

calhoun137• 13 years ago

Here's the problem. If your team takes the time to really try and come up with something that everyone agreed they wanted to eat, then you all end up with a high quality lunch. If you just start with the worst idea and iterate from there you run the risk of getting something that has bugs in it which you don't even realize were there until much later when it's already too late.

pilsetnieks• 13 years ago

On the other hand, you're anchoring on the worst possible idea. Afterwards even barely mediocre will seem pretty great compared to the McD idea.

The McDonald's Theory of Bad Ideas

Related Stories