Have I Spread Myself Too Thin

Occasionally, this is a question that I ask myself.

(More often, it’s a question that other people ask me…)

I normally just shrug, and say ‘probably’

And I’m not going to pretend that it isn’t a problem to spread yourself too thin

Obviously by the very definition, it is a problem - you’re spread across too many things.

But a problem that’s related to that?

Is that people only have one solution for it.

‘You need to let some things go and prioritise’

As always, there’s inevitably more than one way of solving a problem.

So my solution?

Find a way to do them all.

Which sounds very stupid, and like I’m doubling down on spreading myself too thin.

But I disagree

Sometimes taking a step back and looking at how you can get something done with less time - is a really helpful part of the process

After all - not to blow my own trumpet, but the ideas for what I want to do are good ideas. I know they’ll work.

Why would I want to wait on them?

Plus, I could ‘do them after’ - but the nature of good ideas means someone else is always having them and acting on them. I don’t like getting beat to doing stuff.

If you’re like me, and you love doing lots of different shit (I know you’re out there, I’ve spoken to like 4 of you in the past 7 days)

Here are some ways to do more:

AI - Not just ‘Use it to save time on content’ - find out how to use it to research, develop and build ideas Partnerships - Get like-minded people to help you with the stuff. This one has been a game changer for me in the past year. Money - Blunt, but most problems are solved by throwing cash at them. If you need to free up time, pay for it. Not procrastinate - This one is aimed at me. Look at your time, and make sure you’re using it well MVP - Don’t build the whole thing, test it works Get clear - Most people get stuck because there’s a bit of an idea, but not fully formed. Give yourself an hour to get fully clear on what it is, and what next steps are

Connections

• [[Senior developers get more from AI than juniors]] — The “find a way to do them all” solution only works if you have enough expertise to direct AI effectively across multiple domains. AI is a force multiplier — and force multiplied by more force gives disproportionate returns. Spreading thin with AI works for seniors who can prompt well, verify fast, and discard bad output. For juniors, it just produces more mediocre output faster. The implicit argument: you can do it all because you have the domain depth, not in spite of it.
• [[Success Triggers the Clarity Paradox]] — McKeown’s clarity paradox is the structural diagnosis for the condition this spark describes. Success creates options, options diffuse effort, diffused effort undermines clarity. But this spark rejects the standard remedy (say no, prioritise) in favour of a different one (find ways to do more with less). The tension between McKeown’s “refuse the opportunities success generates” and this spark’s “find a way to do them all” is genuine and unresolved — and the answer may depend on whether you are in phase two (success generating options) or phase three (diffused effort undermining clarity).
• [[The Red Queen]] — The anxiety beneath “have I spread myself too thin?” includes a Red Queen fear: “someone else is always having them and acting on them. I don’t like getting beat to doing stuff.” This is Red Queen logic applied to ideas rather than content. The solutions offered (AI, partnerships, MVP) are all Red Queen escape routes — ways to run a different race rather than running faster on the same one. The MVP principle in particular is anti-Red Queen: test whether the idea works before committing to the full build.
• [[The Four Levels of AI Maturity for Coaches]] — AI is listed first among the solutions, and the description — “find out how to use it to research, develop and build ideas” — is a Level 3-4 application. Level 1-2 AI saves time on content. Level 3-4 AI allows you to pursue multiple projects simultaneously because it amplifies your thinking across domains. The “spread too thin” problem shrinks as AI maturity increases, because each project requires less of your finite cognitive bandwidth.
• [[The act of creation is the fix]] — The refusal to prioritise and the insistence on doing everything may not be strategic — it may be neurochemical. Serial entrepreneurs show insensitivity to performance feedback: they keep creating regardless of whether projects succeed or fail, because the act of creation itself triggers the neural reward. The “good ideas” justification (“the ideas are good, I know they’ll work”) might be the rational story the wanting system tells to keep the creative dopamine flowing. The question: is “find a way to do them all” a strategy or an addiction narrative?

Tensions

• “Find a way to do them all” and “get clear” contradict each other. The final solution listed is “give yourself an hour to get fully clear on what it is.” But the premise of the spark is that you should not let anything go. Genuine clarity often reveals that some ideas are less viable than they seemed, which means getting clear might lead to the very prioritisation the spark rejects. The hour of clarity could be the mechanism that forces the uncomfortable trim.
• The solutions assume the bottleneck is execution, not attention. AI, partnerships, money, and MVPs all solve for execution bandwidth. But the deeper problem with spreading thin may be attentional — the inability to think deeply about any single project because your mind is fragmented across seven. No amount of AI or delegation solves the attention problem. It may even worsen it by making it easier to start more things without finishing any of them.