Incentivize inputs, then outputs

A child practices piano. You say “great job practicing.” You don’t say “that sounded terrible.”

An employee ships a product. You don’t say “great job trying.” You say “did it work?”

These aren’t contradictions. They’re two phases of the same system.

The training phase

When someone is learning, the only thing that matters is that they keep going. Reward the inputs: effort, repetition, showing up, trying again after failing. Results are noise at this stage because the machinery isn’t built yet.

Punishing bad outputs during training teaches people to stop trying.

The performing phase

Once the machinery is built, inputs become invisible. Nobody cares how hard you worked — they care what you produced. Reward the outputs: results, quality, delivery.

Rewarding inputs during performance creates people who are busy but ineffective.

The transition

This is where most systems fail. School rewards inputs for 18 years, then the market rewards outputs overnight. The cliff is brutal.

The better model is a gradient. Gradually shift the ratio. Early on, it’s 90% input incentives. Over time, slide toward output incentives. At each checkpoint, the person proves they can handle more output accountability.

The real graduation

The goal isn’t to move someone from external input incentives to external output incentives. It’s to build someone who self-regulates their own inputs without anyone watching.

The performing phase works when someone has internalized the training discipline. They reward their own effort. They maintain their own machinery.

That’s the only graduation that matters.