I don't usually speak in metaphors. But, nonetheless, here we go.

The phrase "flow like water" is often equated to "go with the flow". But this is a disservice to water. Instead of water as a passive, flexible construct, I like to imagine the active form.

Note: This essay is primarily focused on "work". The metaphor is likely applicable to life outside of work, but I haven't done the thinking yet.

In my mind, flowing like water actually means to:

• Rush down efficient pathways

• Seep through, or course around, blockers

Rush down efficient pathways

Finding 80/20 opportunities. Picking low-hanging fruit. Doubling down on a working strategy. A lot can be gained by taking the path of least resistance. But I try not to conflate convenient with efficient.

"Efficient" pathways implies there is a ratio of effort to result. There are many easy pathways, but I rarely find they are efficient. Be on the lookout for repeatable processes, patterns, and standardizations that get results. Double down when you find such a process or pattern. Analyze the effort to result ratio. Observe if that ratio increases, decreases, or stays constant over time. When the result is no longer worth the effort, or if a more efficient pathway is discovered, pivot.

Seep through, or course around, blockers

Blockers. If your goal is to accomplish great things, blockers are inconvenient or even devastating. However, If you goal is to do as much is *reasonably possible*, blockers may actually be comforting. They signal the end of a path, allowing you to focus on other areas. A cynical person might say blockers allow blame to fall on a third party.

Regardless of your view, blockers can often be overcome. I've learned, though, that simply taking the blocker head on rarely works. I've tried this brute force method many times. Whenever it did work, it came with consequences.

When faced with a blocker I deem should be overcome, I try to decide if it is a blocker that can be seeped through or coursed around.

Seeping through a blocker means to find the cracks and exploit them. Most processes have cracks. A great leader or contributor can find them. The crack may be finding the lone person sympathetic to your cause. Said person may know a person, and so on and so on. Other cracks show themselves after understanding the motivations of your blocker.

For example, one time I wanted to implement a complicated email flow at a previous company. I felt this email flow would produce better results than the standard template. This was rejected due to the amount of effort it would take the email team.

What I discovered, though, was that the email team had recently purchased a new email software. This software came with functionality that hadn't been used. Plus, the email team wasn't against doing the work. They simply needed to justify their time expenditure in the same way I did. Behold, a crack.

"What if this was a pilot project? If the test succeeds, we apply the results to other products as well."

The pitch was reframed from "please implement my dream infrastructure" to "why don't we run an experiment apply the results". I got my ideal email flow. The email team got to experiment with their new software. The results would inform the email flows of other products. The blocker had been seeped through.

Coursing around the blocker is a wholly other approach. It involves finding alternative paths that circumvent the blocker. One application is convincing a higher power to override the blocking decision. While this can be effective, it's a heavy-handed approach that I believe should be a last resort.

A less-aggressive, gentler approach is to find an alternative solution that produces the same result. For example, at a previous company we were looking to hire additional engineering headcount for my team. We were told that there was no budget and the next planning cycle was in 6 months.

My engineering counterpart found a brilliant alternate course. He knew that hiring headcount was more painful for the company than spending cash. Recruiting takes time, employees are difficult to offload, and the cash responsibility is maintained for years. Cash is quick and easy by comparison.

What my teammate did was trade. We had 1 headcount available. He negotiated a trade of 1 headcount into the equivalent cash of 3 headcount. He then used this cash to hire 10 external contractors. Suddenly, we had gone from 1 headcount and requesting more, to 10 additional full-time engineers for one year.

This isn't to say contractors were the direct equivalent of 10 full-time hires, but the point remains that the blocker was overcome and we had the resources we needed.

So, when I run into blockers I try to think the following:

• Can I reframe the pitch?

• Can another action produce the same result?

Flowing like water isn’t about being passive. It’s about problem-solving. Blockers are opportunities to rethink the path forward, not necessarily blockers. Whether you choose to seep through cracks or course around obstacles, the same goal persists: progress.

Give it a try.