Blog

Or: How I learned to stop worrying about my 47 open browser tabs and start shipping Here’s a confession that might sound familiar: I once had what I can only describe as a grief response when I thought I’d lost a book. Not just any book, it was a specific, 1632 page, dog-eared copy filled with all my notes and underlines. The kind of book that had become a contained universe of knowledge, and losing it felt like watching a piece of my carefully constructed intellectual fortress crumble. If you just nodded knowingly, keep reading. If you’re thinking “well…that’s a bit dramatic,” this probably isn’t for you (and that’s perfectly okay). The Research Rabbit Hole Olympics Maybe you know this little dance: You start researching a topic for a blog post. Three hours later, you have 23 browser tabs open, two new books in your Amazon cart, and a growing certainty that you definitely don’t know enough yet to write anything worth reading. Sound familiar? Here’s what usually happens next: Someone cheerfully tells you to “just get it out there!” or “done is better than perfect!” And you smile politely while internally screaming because they clearly don’t understand that your version of “done” involves knowing absolutely everything there is to know about a topic. They call it “overthinking”. You just call it “Tuesday”. The Real Story Behind the “Overthinker” Label Let me tell you why that advice misses the mark entirely and why your so-called “overthinking” might actually be your secret weapon. For over a decade, I stood in front of audiences in 25 states knowing that my credibility hinged on one thing: being able to answer any curveball question thrown my way. Not most questions. Any question! This meant studying like my professional life depended on it (because it did). Relentless preparation. Meticulous note-taking. Continuous refinement. I wasn’t just delivering information, I was building an internal fortress of knowledge to make sure I was never caught off guard. My standard became: “Enough” means “knowing absolutely everything possible.” Then came my years in high-tech manufacturing, programming lasers for aerospace, defense, and medical projects. The tolerances? Try +0.0000″ / -0.0001″. Read that again. Zero room for “good enough.” Zero room for “we’ll fix it in post.” One tiny mistake could mean scrapping an entire project worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. This environment didn’t just teach me attention to detail, it rewired my brain to see imperfection as genuinely dangerous. Later, producing thousands of SEO-optimized articles and hundreds of tutorial videos meant adhering to strict style guides where factual accuracy wasn’t negotiable. Every claim needed backing. Every statement needed verification. Every detail needed to be perfectly clear. Okay, now add to this mix: growing up as a military kid, I was constantly adapting, trying to adapt to new schools and environments, often under the scrutiny that comes with always being “the new kid.” Plus a demanding parent who expected me to do everything with military precision, not just a little effort. So, reading became my refuge. Books were safe harbors of well-contained, verifiable knowledge. Each one was a complete universe I could master and carry with me wherever we moved next. When Superpowers Become Kryptonite Here’s the plot twist: These experiences created someone exceptional at thoroughness, accuracy, and strategic thinking. In the right context, these are absolute superpowers. But when the context shifts, when you’re working for yourself without external deadlines, editors, or drill sergeants, these same strengths can become invisible chains. The cycle looks like this: Research feels safe and productive → AI makes research feel infinite (there’s always one more angle to explore) → Publishing feels vulnerable and incomplete → Back to research we go. Meanwhile, your brilliant insights sit in drafts folders, helping exactly no one. The Reframe That Changes Everything What if I told you that everything you’ve been told about your “overthinking” is wrong? You’re not overthinking. You’re demonstrating strategic foresight. You’re not being a perfectionist to a fault. You’re showing commitment to excellence. You don’t have control issues. You have standards for precision and reliability. These aren’t character flaws that need fixing. They’re professional strengths that need channeling. The real challenge? Learning to create your own finish lines when you’re used to having them imposed by others. Building Your External Scaffolding Since your internal drive for comprehensive knowledge is so strong (and valuable!), the solution isn’t to fight it. Nope, it’s to build external systems that harness it productively. The Minimum Viable Content (MVC) Revolution Before any research, write this sentence: “For this content to solve [specific problem] for [specific audience], the absolute minimum they need to know is…” Then set a timer for 60 minutes max. When it goes off, research stops. Period. This isn’t about lowering your standards. It’s about defining them more precisely. The Pre-Flight Check Before diving deep, share a simple outline with one trusted person (colleague, friend, ideal client). Ask: “What critical pieces am I missing?” This gives you that external benchmark of “enough” that you’re used to having from editors and project managers. The Assembly Line Approach Block separate time for: 4 AI Prompts as Your New Style Guide I’ve developed specific prompts that act like the strict guidelines you’re used to following: Prompt 1: Scope Definition My target audience is: [specific type] The single problem this solves: [one sentence] Provide ONLY: 2-3 sentence problem summary, 3-5 essential questions, 3-5 core solutions, 2-3 common pitfalls. Be concise. This is foundation only, not deep dive. Prompt 2: Essential Information Only For each core solution identified, provide ONLY: No theoretical discussions. Impact over comprehensiveness. Prompt 3: Audience Connection & Emotional Hooks Considering my target audience [restate audience] and the problem of [restate problem], suggest: Focus on emotional resonance and specific, relatable details. Prompt 4: The Critical Check I’ve researched [problem] for [audience] focusing on core solutions and takeaways for MVC. Is there any single piece of information so fundamentally critical that omitting it would make this solution ineffective or harmful?