Posts
I was recently paging through a back issue of The Costco Connection, the monthly magazine that Costco sends out to its members. In a letter from their editor, David W. Fuller, was a statement that struck me as being incredibly profound, "...the importance of seeking excellence, not perfection".
In our constant pursuit to be the best, we sometimes loose sight of that which is perhaps even more important, excelling at what we do. Corporate Value and Mission Statements are frequently peppered with phrases like "Being the Best", "Offering the Best Value", and "Being the Perfect Partner". What is so often lost in our quest for perfection is the intrinsic value of simply being good at something and working towards becoming better.
On some level, we all strive to be the best at what we do. We might like to think that what our companies offer is the best, but sometimes I think we would be better off by simply focusing our efforts on being excellent. Are we willing to recognize our shortcomings and strive towards excellence? Excellence, it seems is achievable, but perfection is more like a mirage in a desert; seemingly right in front of us but impossible to grasp.
From an organizational standpoint, perhaps we would be more successful if we approached strategic goals differently. Strategic goals gives us something to aim towards. However, its impossible to achieve these goals when approaching as one problem. Perhaps, if we spent more time solving smaller, easier to identify issues, we would have an easier time of reaching our longer term strategic goals.
By delivering excellence in solving the smaller issues that plague our organizations, we allows ourselves to strive towards perfection.
For many companies the business plan is NOT to be the best. A well know fast food company does not want to produce the best burger, they are more interested it producing a repeatable and consitant product in every store anywhere in the world.
ReplyDeleteA well know software company that I worked for did not produce the "best in breed" software that other companies did, but they sold very well because the products were bundled together, played nice with other companies software or was first on the block with a new idea. Those were the things they did well.
As a programmer I was always told that the window of opportunity for software was small, perfection was not part of the equation for getting through that window. "We can always fix problems later."
This is not to say that companies can't or shouldn't set a goal for being the best, but only a few products can be the best and customers will know what those products (or workers) are. And customers are not always interested in having the best, they also worry about price, availability, suitability. etc.
K:
A company in the lead is frequently spending more time looking over their shoulder at the company right behind, than looking ahead. A number 2 player can do extremely well just focusing at being the best number 2.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Hertz say that at one time?
ReplyDeleteK