Big Vision, Incremental Progress Rule
Take safe incremental wins while preserving the direction of the larger mission
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~ongoing to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 95%
This decision rule combines an ambitious destination with pragmatic execution. Leaders begin by defining the larger outcome they want, then assess what meaningful progress is achievable under current constraints. An incremental step should be taken when it moves in the right direction and does not violate a harm-avoidance test—the episode describes this as not violating the Hippocratic oath. Success is therefore not measured only by complete victory; partial gains can accumulate, create capabilities, shift expectations, and enable later action. The framework also prevents perfectionism from turning an unavailable ideal solution into an excuse for inaction. Its discipline lies in distinguishing genuine forward movement from compromises that merely look active, produce unacceptable damage, or lock the system onto a path incompatible with the larger vision.
Origin
Extracted from Masters in Business
Core principles
- 01Hold a large vision without demanding immediate total victory
- 02Accept that meaningful change often arrives through many small steps
- 03Take available progress when it does not create unacceptable harm
- 04Judge setbacks within the larger direction of travel
- 05Preserve future options while advancing today
How to run it
- 1
Define the Big Vision
Specify the long-term outcome that gives individual decisions their direction. Make the destination clear enough to distinguish progress from drift.
Pro tip Express the vision in observable outcomes rather than broad aspirations.
Watch out A vague vision makes almost any activity appear useful.
- 2
Find the Available Gain
Identify the concrete improvement achievable under present political, financial, technical, or organizational constraints. Focus on movement that can actually be secured.
Pro tip Look for steps that build capability or make the next improvement easier.
Watch out Do not confuse symbolic activity with substantive progress.
- 3
Apply the Harm Test
Ask whether the incremental move creates unacceptable damage, violates core principles, or forecloses the larger objective. Reject it if those costs outweigh its progress.
Pro tip Consider irreversible effects and precedent, not just immediate benefits.
Watch out Incrementalism is not a license to accept every compromise.
- 4
Take the Step
Act when the move is both achievable and directionally sound. Do not wait for a complete solution if a safe, meaningful gain is available now.
Pro tip Document why the step advances the larger mission.
Watch out Perfectionism can turn strategic patience into avoidable inaction.
- 5
Compound the Progress
Measure the result and use it to create the next opportunity. Continue iterating while periodically checking alignment with the big vision.
Pro tip Treat each win as infrastructure for subsequent change.
Watch out A sequence of disconnected small wins can still drift away from the intended outcome.
In the wild
A government cannot enact a complete climate program but can fund basic and applied clean-energy research. It takes the available investment, measures resulting innovation, and then seeks to renew and expand the program rather than treating the first allocation as sufficient.
→ Incremental funding advances technology while preserving the larger goal of sustained decarbonization.
A policy team fails to secure its entire legislative agenda but identifies a narrower measure that creates real benefits without undermining the ultimate reform. It adopts the measure and continues organizing for the larger change.
→ The team preserves momentum and produces tangible progress despite an incomplete political victory.
Common mistakes
Waiting for Total Victory
Rejecting every partial gain can leave the larger vision no closer to reality.
Taking Harmful Compromises
A step that causes unacceptable harm or blocks future progress fails the framework's Hippocratic test.
Losing Sight of the Destination
Incremental activity without recurring alignment checks can become drift rather than progress.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for policy, organizational change, and long-term initiatives constrained by institutions, coalitions, or uncertainty.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal when an incremental compromise causes irreversible harm or structurally blocks the ultimate objective.
From the transcript
“if you can advance progress incrementally, and you can do it in a way that doesn't violate the hippocratic oath. You should grab that and…”
“while you have to have a big vision, the world moves in you know, lots of incremental steps along the way.”
From the episode
Brian Deese on What’s Driving ESG Investing
Brian Deese