What function do you place between effort and reward? — Reading 'The Map of Effort'

In this article, I will write about my thoughts after reading Hiroyuki Araki's 'The Map of Effort' (CrossMedia Publishing).

This book structures the relationship between effort and reward in an easy-to-understand way in response to the question, 'Does effort pay off?' I read this as a book that provides a map of the correspondence one assumes exists between effort and reward.

The book organizes the idea that there are multiple levels of effort itself, and several different landing points for rewards.

Furthermore, the process from effort to reward is not necessarily clear, and it is perceived that people place a 'myth' based on empirical rules there. I hope you will look at the book for the detailed classifications, but what I found particularly interesting was this concept of 'myth'.

I read this as a question of 'what kind of function do you place between effort and reward?' How do you design the effort itself? What kind of reward are you aiming for? And how do you think the two are connected?

In this article, rather than summarizing the contents of the book, I would like to write about my own thoughts using this framework as a clue.

1. Why is it a 'myth'?

The process of obtaining some reward from effort is, to a greater or lesser extent, a success story. Two people who put in similar effort do not necessarily receive the same reward. Various elements such as luck, timing, and the differences in the environments in which those people are placed intertwine to produce results.

Therefore, the relationship that 'if you put in this effort, you will get this reward' cannot be fully verified. Even so, people create a certain explanation about the connection between the two based on their own or others' limited experiences.

It is subjective and likely tied to that person's worldview. I felt that the 'mythical nature' the author felt was not simply that the explanation lacks clear evidence, but rather that we cannot help but create meaningful stories about relationships that cannot be sufficiently observed.

2. Why did I read it as a 'function'?

The author views the process connecting effort and reward as a 'black box.' We cannot fully know the reality of what path effort takes to lead to a reward. This is because many factors other than effort are involved, and even if you put in the same effort, it does not necessarily produce the same result.

Even so, when we let effort be x and reward be y, aren't we unconsciously assuming a correspondence where some y is produced according to x? Of course, this is not a function in the mathematical sense. In a mathematical function, one output is determined for one input. However, in reality, the results differ even with the same effort, and there are many unobservable variables such as luck and environment. Even so, the reason the word 'function' came to my mind is not because of the relationship between effort and reward in reality itself, but because the correspondence model that people assume in their heads looked like a function.

Some people think that if you increase effort, the reward will increase proportionally, while others think that results will suddenly appear after exceeding a certain accumulation. Some may think that even if results are not immediately visible, they will return later in a compound interest manner. I interpreted that the 'myth' referred to in this book can also be read as a subjective correspondence model placed between such effort and reward.

3. Why is it important to know the types of myths?

The myths referred to in this book are greatly influenced by a person's experience and cognitive habits. Therefore, I think it is difficult to notice that you are assuming a specific myth. Are you perceiving the relationship between effort and reward proportionally? Do you think results will suddenly rise from a certain point? Or do you assume a more complex and indirect relationship? Depending on which myth you adopt, your evaluation of your current effort will change. * Not enough effort yet * Should continue as is * Need to change the quality or direction of effort * Should rethink the reward being aimed for in the first place. Even in the same state of not achieving results, the meaning is not singular. Therefore, I think the value of knowing the types of myths is not in 'being taught the correct myth,' but in being able to visualize which model you are assuming and re-select it according to your purpose.

Furthermore, by perceiving the relationship between effort and reward as a 'function,' it becomes easier to compare what kind of correspondence you are assuming. Is it proportional, is there a threshold, or does it take effect later? By thinking this way, I thought it would become easier to treat myths not just as objects of belief, but as models that can be re-selected.

Summary

After reading 'The Map of Effort,' I have come to perceive the relationship between effort and reward not as a simple causal relationship, but as a correspondence relationship with a black box in between. If you put in effort, you will not necessarily get a commensurate reward. Even if you put in the same effort, the results will differ, and many factors other than effort are involved. The true process from effort to reward cannot be fully observed. Even so, we assume some kind of relationship between effort and reward in the form of 'if I continue this effort, it will eventually lead to results,' 'the reason there are no results yet is because the amount of effort is insufficient,' or 'I need to change the quality of my effort, not the current method.' I understood that the 'myth' referred to in this book is a model that people have created based on their experience and cognitive habits for such invisible processes. And I read that model as something like a 'function.' The function here is not reality itself, but a metaphor for the correspondence that we assume in our heads. Depending on what kind of function you place, the meaning of a state where results are not appearing changes. Should you increase effort, should you continue as is, or should you change the method? The difference in judgment arises not only from the effort itself, but also from the difference in the myths behind it.

Therefore, I think the value of knowing the types of myths is not in choosing one correct myth. It is in knowing what kind of function you are placing between effort and reward. And thinking about whether that function matches the purpose or reward you are currently aiming for, and re-selecting it if necessary.

It is important to both optimize your methods of effort and clarify the rewards you are aiming for.
However, I felt that the model you use to connect those two things is just as important for continuing and refining your efforts.

In this article, I read 'myth' as a function, but this book offers various other perspectives for re-evaluating your efforts. Why not try reading it while comparing it to the shape of your own efforts?