Most of us that work in cubes have experienced service that is just good enough. Most of us have done work that is just good enough. But should “good enough” be the standard to uphold?
In a Business Week article titled “Why ‘Good Enough’ is Good Enough” it is argued that technology has become more and more unreliable in a unit sense — any particular application can be down for a while — it is actually good for innovation and the consumer at the same time. Our “imperfections,” if you will, drive us to get newer products and services out the door faster because they a just good enough. As a result, there is always a backup through a different product or service that does work.
Perhaps good enough is OK for consumer technology — after all, who has to worry about the little old consumer if something is down for four hours — but it’s not OK for either how we work nor the applications we depend on to get our work done.
If your work is dependent upon your e-mail system and that system is down for four hours a week, it’s not helping your work.
If your application you use 80% of the day to do your work is down once a week, good enough isn’t helping your work.
If your health is dependent upon surgery, is good enough what you want your doctor’s work to be during surgery?
If you only deliver what you say you will deliver only 60% of the time, is that good enough? Or 80% of the time?
The problem with building your delivery of work around “good enough” and the technology you need to do your work to “good enough” is that it doesn’t promote excellence that will differentiate your personal brand or your company’s products and services to your customer.
If you’re familiar with the saying “good enough for government work,” you know that it’s not exactly complimentary. In fact, it is representative of shoddy work that will pass low standards.
Good enough products, customer service, management, work tasks completed is a nice way of saying we’ve lowered are standards about what is acceptable. It’s not good enough for me.