How is "think of a goal, then stuff you can do to reach the goal, then do it" not common sense? Is it non-obvious if you just throw in a bunch of buzzwords like 'execute', 'iterate' and 'freemium'?
Most people jump right in to the execution phase without really thinking about what growth and value hypotheses they're trying to prove, how to measure success, have no tools to prioritize between different tactics, and no framework in place to learn.
This post at least outlines that framework for learning. It's a bit different from "do stuff towards your goals".
While in principle I agree, I think you may also want to consider the fact that most people do not have formal training in engineering (or anything technical, for that matter). Most HN readers probably do, but what if the article wasn't written specifically for HN readers? So this way of thinking systematically is new/unfamiliar for a lot of people.
I would argue that 'common sense' needs to be consciously considered and validated before it becomes common sense <em>to you</em>. So in that regard, since it's so obvious already, I doubt the author had you in mind when he wrote the article :)
Its simple, but there are often equally simple failures at each step.
1. Do you even know your high level goal (a lot of times people inside larger organizations do not).
2. When you '(think of) stuff you can do to reach the goal, then do it". Is the prioritization of that stuff based on the leverage you expect that stuff to have. Are you actively seeking out knowledge that allows you to prioritize correctly? etc...
Agreed. Getting quite tired of the lists that go as: 1. common sense, 2. common sense, 3. common sense, yada yada yada n - 1. common sense n. trial and error is the only method (if you consider it is a method).
How is "think of a goal, then stuff you can do to reach the goal, then do it" not common sense? Is it non-obvious if you just throw in a bunch of buzzwords like 'execute', 'iterate' and 'freemium'?