
A lot of "complicated" problems have simple solutions.

It doesn't seem like this is true because smart people don't want to admit that their problems have simple answers; they want to feel like they have difficult problems that need years of experience to solve.

Ravi Gupta, a partner at Sequoia, told this story in an interview on [The Knowledge Project](https://fs.blog/knowledge-project-podcast/ravi-gupta/):

> There’s this person who I worked with at Instacart….She was an ops leader in San Francisco, and the scenario she would give during an interview is, "You’re one of the managers in San Francisco, and one of the people at the Safeway in Potrero Hill calls you and says, 'The refrigerator where we store the groceries isn't working. What do we do?"
> 
> She said you get all these answers…. Sometimes people have backgrounds that are academic in nature. They'd say, “I’d call all the rest of the stores and I’d figure out if there’s a systematic problem with our fridges.” “I would analyze the data, I’d look at the sales that we’re going to lose in that store based on the fridge, and I would try to create a new algorithm that didn’t have people drop it off in the store,” and all these answers.

At first, this seems like a "complicated" problem. The fridge plays a vital role in Instacart's business at a store. If the fridge is broken, what do they do with all the orders? They could cancel them, but that would make a lot of customers angry. They could try and transfer the orders to a different store, but again, that would leave a lot of customers unhappy. Maybe you could run a promo for free delivery? But if you did that, you'd have to get engineers involved to make it all work in the app.

This is how easy it is to make it feel like you have a "complicated" problem.

The answer they were looking for in the interview was devastatingly simple:

> Then the people she’d hire every time would be like, “I’d go to Potrero Hill and I’d fix the fridge. Or, I’d go and stop somewhere else and buy a new fridge and bring it there.” Every time. She’s like, **“The answer is ‘Fix the fridge.’** Find a way to have us have a refrigerated thing as soon as possible so we can continue to run the business.”

Don't overcomplicate the problems in your life to make yourself aware of—or demonstrate to others—your brilliance.

If you have a problem, look for the simple solution first.

If the fridge is broken, fix the fridge.


Fix the fridge

Every good story-at-sea has at least two of three elements: a shipwreck, murder, or mutiny. While this tale definitely had the second, the third is questionable, and the first doesn’t appear at all.

Richard Snow does his best to recount the complicated and mysterious story aboard the _Somers,_ which is magnificent.

In 1848, the _Somers_, a US brig-of-war, set out from New York Harbor on a journey south with young naval officers. Its mission was to deliver papers, but its real mission was to teach its young crew what sea-faring life was like. (The Naval Academy at Annapolis was yet to exist, and, as a result of what happened on this ship, would be created.)

![](https://evm.heg.mybluehost.me/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/IMG_2548-1-768x1024.jpg)

Phillip Spencer

Aboard the ship was Phillip Spencer, a “young punk” who just so happened to be the son of the Secretary of War for President John Tyler. Events ensued aboard the ship—a supposed mutiny led by Spencer—which caused Captain Alexander Mackenzie to hang Philip Spencer and two of his comrades.

The book’s first half explains the background of some of the crew and the events that lead to the eventual hanging. The second half covers the dramatic “inquiry” and court-martial into Captain Mackenzie’s behavior that sought to determine: 1. Was a mutiny _really_ going to happen? And 2. If so, was hanging the culprits necessary?

The drama rests in the fact that while Mackenzie claims a mutiny was coming, and Spencer admitted to talking about it, the actual likelihood of a mutiny happening was not great. So, the question was, did Mackenzie act too rashly? Some thought he did, others thought he acted valiantly. Maybe the fact that this was the only mutiny in US naval history gives us the answer.

At both the “inquiry”—a formal investigation simply to gather facts—and the subsequent court-martial, the captain’s behavior was deemed appropriate, and he faced no punishment. Philip Spencer’s father and the bride of another hanged were calling for Mackenzie’s prosecution for murder. They doubted a mutiny was really going to happen and thought Mackenzie’s punishment was overboard (no pun intended). Mackenzie’s log of whippings on board reveals he might be quick to punish. In total, he administered over 2,000 lashes to sailors who acted out of line, the youngest of which was a mere boy.

![](https://evm.heg.mybluehost.me/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/IMG_2549-1-768x1024.jpg)

Captain Alexander Mackenzie

And that’s the story. Dramatic and entertaining? Yes.

My one critique (which, as a professional, I am not) about the book was that the author relied too heavily on direct quotes. In a story like this, having primary sources is important, but at times, the frequent direct quotes stopped the flow of the story.

For example:

> On March 28, “the court met this day in pursuance of adjournment…And the court being cleared, the court proceeded to consider the charges and specifications, and to make their finding thereon.”

Why not just write, “On March 28, the court met to consider the arguments and determine a verdict.” I understand the appeal of quoting the direct source, but the quote is just cumbersome.

I also didn’t like how he referenced two modern-day inventions as an

Still, like with any part of history, there is much to learn. Mainly, one is left asking why Mackenzie risked his career to hang the Secretary of War’s son on mere _talk_ of mutiny and a picture of a ship with a black flag. Such is the lesson to take away from this. It’s hard to undo hanging someone, yet it seemed as if Captain Mackenzie was set on this method of discipline from the very beginning. Why?

It’s theorized in the book’s epilogue that his decision was intentional. In a time of peace, it would be hard for a ship captain to become famous, as many of his peers did in the Battle of 1812.

So, was the decision to hang the son of such a prominent figure Mckenzie’s way of being remembered? Perhaps. Here we are, two hundred years later, still talking about him.

decisions