Is Good Enough Bad?

In a recent conversation, two competing theories emerged leaving me with a big question... "Is Good Enough Bad?".

The theories go like this:

Good is the Enemy of Great

Meaning, If we settle for just being "good" at something we will never become great. To be great is to be revolutionary.

Best is the Enemy of Good

Meaning, if we always try to be "The Best" we are missing the opportunity to be "Good". Further, setting a goal of being "The Best" can be daunting and insurmountable.

Is it more important to be "The Best" at the risk of setting an unreachable goal? Or is being "Good" an acceptable goal if means getting something done? The only answer I can come up with is that we should be best at the things that matter to us personally. And then break down each obstacle into the smallest bits so we can navigate without getting overwhelmed...

Comments

[Matthew Cornell]

Hmmm. Great question. Perfectionism vs. quality - a 2x2! Strangely, I have no answers.