1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
|
#+date: <2020-10-12 Mon 00:00:00>
#+title: Embracing Mediocrity: When Good Enough is Truly Enough
#+description: Exploring the balance between perfection and mediocrity in life, work, and decision-making. Understand why striving for "good enough" can lead to better outcomes and less stress.
#+slug: mediocrity
* Perfect is the Enemy of Good
As the saying goes, "the best is the enemy of the good." As we strive for
perfection, we often fail to realize the implications of such an undertaking.
Attempting to reach perfection is often unrealistic. Even worse, it can get in
the way of achieving a good outcome. In certain situations, we try so hard to
achieve the ideal solution that we have burned the bridges that would have
allowed us to reach a lesser yet still superb solution.
Philosophers throughout history have inspected this plight from many viewpoints.
Greek mythology speaks of the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_mean_(philosophy)][golden mean]], which uses the story of Icarus to
illustrate that sometimes "the middle course" is the best solution. In this
story, Daedalus, a famous artist of his time, built feathered wings for himself
and his son so that they might escape the clutches of King Minos. Daedalus warns
his beloved son whom he loved so much to "fly the middle course", between the
sea spray and the sun's heat. Icarus did not heed his father; he flew up and up
until the sun melted the wax off his wings. For not heeding the middle course,
he fell into the sea and drowned.
More recently, management scholars have explored the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle][Pareto principle]] and found
that as we increase the frequency of something, or strive to perform actions to
achieve some form of perfection, we run into [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns][diminishing returns]].
Even further, Harold Demsetz is noted as coining the term [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy][the Nirvana fallacy]] in
1969, which shows the fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic,
idealized alternatives. This is another trap that we may fall into, where we are
constantly thinking of the ultimate solutions to problems, when something more
realistic needs to be considered.
Over and over throughout history, we've found that perfection is often
unrealistic and unachievable. However, we push ourselves and our peers to "give
100%" or "go the extra mile," while it may be that the better course is to give
a valuable level of effort while considering the effects of further effort on
the outcome. Working harder does not always help us achieve loftier goals.
This has presented itself to me most recently during my time studying at my
university. I was anxious and feeling the stresses of my courses, career, and
personal life for quite a while, which was greatly affecting how well I was
doing at school and my level of effort at work. One day, I happened to be
talking to my father when he said something simple that hit home:
#+begin_quote
All you can do is show up and do your best. Worrying about the outcomes won't
affect the outcome itself.
#+end_quote
The thought was extremely straightforward and uncomplicated, yet it was
something that I had lost sight of during my stress-filled years at school. Ever
since then, I've found myself pausing and remembering that quote every time I
get anxious or stressed. It helps to stop and think "Can I do anything to affect
the outcome, or am I simply worrying over something I can't change?"
* When Mediocrity Isn't Enough
One problem with the philosophies presented in this post is that they are
implemented far too often in situations where mediocrity simply isn't adequate.
For example, let's take a look at digital user data, specifically
personally-identifiable information (PII). As a cybersecurity auditor in the
United States, I have found that most companies are concerned more with
compliance than any actual safeguards over the privacy or protection of user
data. Other than companies who have built their reputation on privacy and
security, most companies will use [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satisficing][satisficing]] as their primary decision-making
strategy around user data.
#+begin_quote
Satisficing is a decision-making strategy or cognitive heuristic that entails
searching through the available alternatives until an acceptability threshold is
met.
#+end_quote
This means that each decision will be met with certain possible solutions until
one of the solutions meets their minimum acceptable standards. For companies
that deal with user data, the minimum-acceptable standards come from three
areas:
1. Laws and regulations
2. Competitive pressure
3. Risk of monetary or reputation loss
Working with project management or auditing, the primary concern here is the
risk of legal ramifications. Since the primary risk comes from laws and
regulations, companies will require that any project that involves user data
must follow all the rules of those laws so that the company can protect itself
from fines or other penalties.
Following this, companies will consider best practices in order to place itself
in a competitive position (e.g. Google vs. Apple) and review any recent or
ongoing litigation against companies regarding user data. In a perfect company,
management would then consider the ethical responsibilities of their
organization and discuss their responsibilities over things like
personally-identifiable information.
However, as we mentioned above, most companies follow the idea of satisficing,
which states that they have met the minimum acceptable standards and can now
move on to other decisions. Modern business culture in the United States
dictates that profits are the golden measure of how well a company or manager is
performing, so we often don't think about our responsibilities beyond these
basic standards.
Not all situations demand excellence, but I believe that applying any philosophy
as a broad stroke across one's life can be a mistake. We must be able to think
critically about what we are doing as we do it and ask ourselves a few
questions. Have I done everything I can in this situation? Is mediocrity an
acceptable outcome, or should we strive for perfection, even if we can't attain
it?
Taking a few moments to think critically throughout our day, as we make
decisions, can have a tremendous effect on the outcomes we create.
|
