# Sometimes you should try to spend as little time as possible.  Sometimes, you need to spend as much time as you can.

Working in, and with, teams who build and maintain software has taught me over and over again that cycle times should be short.  That is: the time between "we could do X" to "we have done X" should be as short as possible.  

That doesn't mean "try harder and build quicker".  It _can_ mean that, but it's more helpful (and sustainable) to think ask questions like "could I actually build 20% of this in an hour, and get _some_ value?" or "do I even need to do this?".  

No matter what you (think you) need to build it's always easier and faster to build nothing.

Inside of a professional setting, this kind of thinking means that your (paid) staff are being utilised, and that they are more constantly delivering value to the folks and robots who use their software.

But what about when you're doing a thing because you enjoy it?  

It can be appealing to just start _doing_ the thing.  Like: start sewing the garment, taking the photos, running the route, or writing the software (but this software is for fun, totally different to software for work).  

Maybe doing the thing brings you joy, or maybe the result of the project, or perhaps (like running) it's good to have done the task, rather than the act of doing the task.

I've been thinking about what "fast cycles" means for the personally fulfilling work that i do.  Does it mean optimising the time-to-completion, or does it mean optimising for time-spent-doing?

In all these cases a shorter cycle time is still worth thinking about.  What's the smallest amount of time I can dedicate to having done a 5k run?  That doesn't necessarily mean running as fast as I can, but maybe it means all the ceremonies and rituals around route planning, garment preparation, and personal hygiene are sorted out.

Or maybe I really enjoy the process of doing: like how I love sewing garments and taking photos - both processes that benefit hugely from being present in a moment.  I think "cycle time" means something different here.  Because I'm not concerned so much about showing my work to others, or justifying my time.  I can still be concerned about the quality of my output, but I'm the judge of it.  

Sometimes I might want a short and snappy project (not that I've ever actually achieved one), but other times I might luxuriate in four hours at a sewing machine, so thinking about cycle times... they're more hindrance than help there.  In those cases, the mental model of cycle time is about asking what we can do to reduce the friction between "I want to do X" and "I am doing X".  

What that means is probably quite boring: making sure that the non-negotiable, but important, parts of life (staying happy, healthy, wealthy) are taken care of.

Sometimes I want to spend as little time as possible doing before I have something tangible to show for my time.  Other times, I want to spend as little time as possible _not_ doing a task.
