“How we spend our days is how we spend our lives.” ~ Annie Dillard
Surely, you’ve experienced it.
As you’re working out the details for a pending project — or maybe while you’re in the middle of a vexing complication — your client comes to the conclusion that maybe the problem is the bar Is just set too high.
“Maybe we should just settle for something more realistic.”
“I’m not sure we’re going to have the budget to make this baby a prize-winner. Maybe on the next one.”
“Sometimes good enough really is, don’t you think?”
When I ask, “What do you want to eliminate and still keep the outcome acceptable?”, the response is usually a reflection of the decision maker’s fears or lack of commitment to excellence rather than the actual constraints of the situation. Seldom do the extra resources required to make a project stand out really cost significantly more in terms of budget or effort.
The more deeply I become aware of the impact of self-protection issues in the workplace, the more I realize that many people, even those in seemingly high positions in organizations, are often afraid of excellence. They don’t want their work to stand out in a way that raises the bar because their next project may be compared to what they’ve done and new expectations set.
Are there ever times when “good enough” is? Sure!
But I believe making that decision in the planning stage of the project – based on the desired impact – is the right choice, not as a rationalization or an excuse for lack of commitment in the middle of the process.
As the opening quote by Annie Dillard suggests, when you spend your life – day after day after yet another tedious day – settling for good enough, you may one day find out that it wasn’t.
Charles