A big thanks to my friend, Annie, at What the Woman Wrote for nominating me for this challenge. I had been away from the blogosphere for some time now. No prizes for guessing work life has been a little too overwhelming. As I write this, there are ten other things on my to-do list, of various priorities, but I believe I shouldn’t be away from something I love doing for too long.
So, I am indeed thankful to Annie for giving me a reason to start blogging again. Let me share the rules of the challenge with you all:
(1) Thank the person who nominated you
(2) Select one quote per day for the next three days and write a little something on it
(3) nominate three other bloggers for the challenge today
The quote for the day from my end is:
“If I had an hour to solve a problem I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about solutions.”
― Albert Einstein
This quote is displayed at various corners in my workplace (Mu Sigma Inc.). My job description requires me to solve problems for clients on a day to day basis. And the above quote is something that the data sciences industry (and many others) lives by. Unless you know the problem in and out, you can never come up with the most efficient solution that you are capable of providing.
What do you think? Was there a time when you had to think about a problem longer than it took you to execute the plans that led to its solutions? Share with me in the Comments below.
I would cheat a little here, and break the third rule of the Three Day Quote Challenge. I am not nominating any three particular persons for this challenge. If you are reading this, and this challenge interests you, nominate yourself from my end for the challenge.
Until later, keep typing!
Cheers,
Arpita
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Scribbles@Arpita 
I like your choice of quote! Oh yes, sometimes I think I ruminate about the problem more than I should. The planner in me thinks I should consider it from all angles to make sure I execute the right solution.
Sounds like you’re enjoying your role, glad to be reading your post again, Arpita! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh absolutely. In our line of work (research physics), diving headlong into a problem is often a recipe for disaster, as the chosen path might lead to a costly (timewise) dead end. It is usually good practice to, first, understand the problem thoroughly and stating it clearly–stating an unsolved and potentially vague problem in clear language with proper definitions is quite a bit of the job done. Once the problem statement is there, the next step is to assess all the possible avenues of attack. This could take anywhere between a couple of hours to sometimes even a couple of years. Once all the possible avenues have been tabulated, one has to be chosen and followed, till one is certain that either (a) the problem is close to a solution or (b) this is a wrong solution method. For case (b), it is then time to pick another method.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person