The Difference Between Difficult and Complicated
As someone who's studied both computers (as an autodidact) and linguistics, I often tend to pay attention to the nuances of meaning found in words. One such distinction that came up this week told me that people don't necessarily understand the difference between "difficult" and "complicated".
Both are cited as examples of why something can't be done. They're cited as reasons why something will be expensive. However, the objections are often aimed at the wrong one.
If you tell someone that the task they're asking to have done is "difficult", they'll go on and on about its simplicity, which only addresses *complexity*. Similarly, when you tell them it's really complex, they'll argue about how "all" that has to be done is to assemble each of the 15,000 components.
Difficulty is usually a measure of your endurance, your will, your fortitude and generally your commitment to following through on the task. These things are difficult, but simple.
- Run a marathon. Just put one foot in front of the other, for 26 miles straight.
- Lose weight. Eat less and exercise more than your base metabolism needs.
- Save enough money for retirement. Max out your 401K in an index fund for the duration of your 45 year career.
Difficult tasks have us fighting our impulses, our emotional needs, our desires and our limits.
Complication is a measure of the number of steps, components and elements involved in the problem. These things are complicated, but easy.
- Assembling a bicycle. Lots of little parts, but anyone who follows the instructions is fine.
- Getting a Linux system running. Lot of steps, but each is well documented via a Google search.
There are things that are *both*, but it's obvious to me that when something is one or the other, the reasons for why it will take a long time or be expensive are entirely different.
And, if someone is facing a *difficult* task, any encouragement should take the form of helping with their fortitude, not the logistics.
February 24th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
Great analysis. The nice thing about difficult tasks is they're generally easier to predict a timeline for. I could tell you with certainty that I can lose 10 pounds in 2 months, or run a marathon in under 4 hours in 3 months since both are just a matter of focus and time.
Complex tasks, on the other hand, can vary tremendously in time based on the quality of guesses made throughout the process.
February 25th, 2007 at 11:50 am
Exactly. And, those tasks that are difficult *because* of their complexity are the nastiest of all to estimate.
Estimation is the most hateful task in software development, bar none. This distinction doesn't make the estimation much easier, but does help focus the discussion when objections arise.
February 26th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
It shouldn't be difficult or complex to make your page render properly in Opera
February 26th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
If the rendering problems were anything other than the cartoon logo not displaying properly, I might bother. I can tell you I'm going to fix it, but I can also guarantee that it's a low enough priority it won't make it to the top of the list before I roll out the redesign.
February 27th, 2007 at 10:37 pm
Fair. Although the two words are related. Complex tasks often demand study, time and more than all, effort, which can increase the difficulty.
But you are right, that's why complex tasks become easier with experience.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:12 am
They are frequently related (hence "There are things that are *both*…"), but it became clear to me this week that people are using them *synonymously* and interchangeably.
Some of the most difficult tasks around are difficult precisely because of their complexity.
March 6th, 2007 at 1:14 am
Found these definitions which are, to me, a better description of the differences (found using google define:xyz).
difficult: not easy; requiring great physical or mental effort to accomplish or comprehend or endure
complicated: difficult to analyse or understand
complex: complicated in structure; consisting of interconnected parts
March 7th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I agree overall with your point. But your difficult tasks can be complicated.
Losing weight involves:
1)planning adequate exercise time
2)choosing a dwelling or work environment that favors a physically active lifestyle
3)having easy access to healthy food.
4)having the time to prepare high quality home-cooked meals.
5)having the attention span to constantly monitor your performance and progress
6)having access to information about the most efficient way to achieve the task.
7)having a job with a schedule that doesn't have too many long hours or time-pressure events that cause you to disregard your schedule
8)not having family commitments that prevent you from accomplishing the preceding 7 tasks.
March 7th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Losing weight can be accomplished by "just" not eating anything but bread and vitamins for 3 months. I'm not saying that's a good approach, but it's certainly *simple*.
If you want to mitigate the difficulty, you can add complexity, which brings in much of your list. The core task itself is simple, but extremely difficult. We've added most of those complexities you mention because the difficulty is so high when you approach it at its simplest.
We often do exactly this kind of thing by bridging some of the difficulty with complexity.
Many of those points also are adding requirements to the original task, things which would have to be clarified to determine the real complexity. Does the weight loss have to be done while eating healthy foods or just lost at all costs? Does the weight loss need to be augmented with exercise? Does it have to be done efficiently, etc.?
March 8th, 2007 at 3:27 am
I know you are just trying to make a semantic point, while I'm trying to make a sociological one.
If you have a geek cubicle job, chances are your risks of being overweight are higher than if you worked in construction, for example.
When in Peace Corps I ate Snickers bars once or sometimes twice a day and stayed slim. That's because I walked 2 miles to work. Contrast that with now when I never eat Snickers bar and am constantly watching what I eat. And yet I still gain weight.
(I live in Houston, the city with the highest percentage of people who are obese–a fact I blame on our urban design among other things).
I don't mean to dismiss the importance of personal responsibility. But the question of why some people are overweight and others are not is a fascinating and complex question.
March 8th, 2007 at 3:31 am
BTW, I like the posting of the weight statistics. 17 pounds is impressive. Congratulations!
March 8th, 2007 at 8:01 am
I've made the other point on weight loss in the past. I grew up farming and working outside, and moved on to jobs servicing computers across campus in college, always paid to be on the move. I could (and did) eat 4000-5000 calories a day and stayed skinny. I graduated from college and even though I cut out a couple thousand calories a day, it wasn't enough and I found myself weighing 300 pounds.
Thanks on the loss. That's actually just since Christmas. I lost about 50 pounds and then stabilized for 9 months or so and began losing again in December. So, I'm actually down a total of about 65 pounds total.
So, I completely understand the difficulty in losing weight. I also know how much of it just boils down to the difficulty of being hungry for 2 years and how people make it more complex than it needs to be, often to try to circumvent the difficulty.
March 23rd, 2007 at 8:55 am
Great comments here! just would like to point out the interesting change in focus, gone from difficulty/complexity to weight loss! As to the former i'd like to say that recently a student of mine, after i had said "look, it's complicated but it's not difficult!", asked me to explain the difference and i had to ask for 24H to find the right words to get non-natives like them to understand.
As to the latter, that is weight loss, i have the opposite problem, just can't put on weight unless i go to the gym five times a weeks. Problem: i walk about five miles a day (just routine activities, shopping, teaching, visiting friends…) and despite (everyday!) chocolate, two pizzas, bread, butter, sweat tea, biscuits, fat cheese, etc., i weigh just 110 pounds for 5ft6in.
Used to be a professional cyclist and weighed 160 pounds. Want to lose weight and feel good at the same time? it's a matter of life-style, move to Europe (eastern Europe or maybe Paris, parisians are skinny too!).