Whenever I was studying for Amazon interviews I always thought “Are Right A Lot” was a weird one. The others were all intuitive, but I think this directly contradicts “Bias for Action” which is more important in my opinion. If you’re moving fast, you’ll get things wrong and that’s ok as long as you fix and improve. If you’re always right, you aren’t learning and trying new things anymore. You’re sticking with problems you’ve already solved or have experience with and getting them right. Maybe someone on the inside could shed some light on what I am missing.
The LPs are goal posts that are in tension with each other. The tension is supposed to spur ingenuity/invention.
The idea is that you don’t give up Bias For Action in order to be Right A Lot. You need to have that Bias for Action while also being Right A Lot and if that doesn’t seem possible, figure out a way to make it possible (in this case, probably iterative development)