The Size of the Box
The Size of the BoxSanta Clara’s School of Law steadily raised tuition year after year, from roughly $44,000 in 2015 to $63,280 in 2025. Yet it just announced its 2026–27 tuition: $50,000. Why the sudden drop, and why such a round number? That's because, starting next year, professional school borrowing in the US will be capped at $50,000 per year. Education costs, it turns out, expand to fill the size of the box we assume to be the default. Change the box, and the “necessary” cost instantly adjusts. This isn’t only about tuition. The length of studies also grew to fit expectations. With a bit of exaggeration: finishing middle school for my grandparents was roughly equivalent to finishing high school for my parents, finishing university for me, and, if we continue the trend, finishing a PhD for my children. Simple degrees that once took one or two years stretched until they matched the duration of other, more complex degrees. The box grew, and everything expanded with it. As a result, we all end up poorer (we begin adult life later and with more debt, and start families even later). The broader issueI see the same dynamic in business. Tasks stretch to the amount of time the manager implicitly allows. Projects and bureaucracy inflate to match the scope and complexity of unrelated projects. Meetings default to the duration that colleagues have normalized, even when the topic does not require it. We rarely ask whether the box we’re using is larger than the work actually needs. But ensuring the box is never larger than necessary can produce dramatic savings in time, effort, and complexity. It’s a question worth asking ritualistically. (As I sometimes joke, a significant part of the value of AI will be in ritualistically invoking simple questions such as "could this be simpler" or "can it be done faster," which people are terrible at keeping on their mind at all times.) (Share this as a blog post) Last week's essay, now publicI usually publish a copy of this newsletter's essays on my blog, but last week was a hectic week, and I didn't do that in time. Apologies. So, here is the link to last week's essay on surveys. ReminderRegistrations to the ninth edition of my Antifragile Organizations course are underway. It will take place in February 2026, but registrations close earlier than that. Tweets & Quotes |
Luca Dellanna
Everyone deserves better managers
I just wanted to share some more information about the 2026 Antifragile Organizations Course curriculum. I also offer a one-on-one version of the course on your schedule; more info below. The Curriculum The desired outcome is for you to learn how to make yourself, your team, and your organization more antifragile: not only more likely to survive problems, but also able to benefit from them. In concrete terms, it means you will change the culture from one where problems are hidden under the...
On surveys According to a recent survey, 12% of Americans aged 18 to 29 say they have operated a nuclear submarine. Of course, this is not possible: only a minuscule fraction of Americans have ever been licensed to operate one. The organization that administered the survey, Pew Research Center, proactively explains that, as in a classic case of Wittgenstein's Ruler, the result should not be read as information about submarine operators but as information about the unreliability of certain...
Beyond Income:Rethinking Redistribution Gradients Recent debates focused on how many dollars should count as the poverty line. Here, I want to ask a more fundamental question: Is income the right yardstick for poverty at all? Low disposable income can mean that someone is genuinely deprived, but it can also mean that someone has deliberately traded away savings or income for other things that matter to them: a nicer place to live, more free time, a less stressful job, better education, richer...