Comparing with others

Research means performing. Performing suggests measurement. And where multiple performers act side by side, comparison and competition are close to inevitable—no matter if working at your desk or when competing to discover the best route to your chosen target. But since research is a complex, mostly qualitative performance, and true insight to compare multiple experiences are difficult, comparisons invariably lead you astray.

Consequently, while you might be interested to look left and right to inform yourself about how you are doing in comparison to others, there is very little point in doing so—except for procrastination. You will not be able to entirely and appropriately compare yourself to others and their project advancement to the degree of accuracy that would inform you meaningfully. In the end, the most useful question is whether you are advancing at a pace that makes sense for you, within your project scheme and given context.

Research projects are, in numerous instances, as individual as their researchers. Do not try to standardize and generalize your performance to make it comparable to that of others—especially not on a whim. More likely than not, your comparison will not take into consideration all relevant factors, especially if it is only developed and considered briefly.

(This is a preview section. The full chapter on this topic continues with the sections “Rough coordinates”, “Train of thought”, “In essence”, “To reflect”, “Two travellers’ tales”, “Devil’s advocate”, and “How to tackle”.)