Don McMinn

Don’t let perfect be an enemy of the good.

This aphorism is an old Italian proverb first made popular by Voltaire who used it in his poem La Bégueule. The literal translation is, the best is the enemy of the good. 

Other philosophers and writers have expressed the thought in slightly different ways. Confucius: “Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without.” Shakespeare: “Striving to better, oft we mar what’s well.”

Perfection is impossible to achieve, so pursuing it is sometimes unnecessary, even counterproductive. The pursuit of perfection can become inefficient and produce diminishing returns. We need to know when good enough is good enough.

Robert Watson-Watt, who developed early warning radar in Britain to counter the rapid growth of the Luftwaffe, warned of a “cult of the imperfect” in which imperfect is unacceptable. (He got pushback on early versions of his radar system because it wasn’t “perfect.”) Instead of waiting until something is perfected, he suggested, “Give them the third best to go with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.” That wise perspective helped the Allies win the war.

Sometimes “done” is adequate. Don’t let perfection be the enemy of done.

• Only spend 45 minutes cleaning your car. You could devote two hours to the project but is the extra time worth it? It may rain tomorrow.
• Want to acknowledge a friend’s birthday? A handwritten, slow-mailed notecard may be the most impactful, but a short phone call or text message will get the job done.
• Instead of waiting to get the perfect tool to do a job, improvise and get it done.

Obviously, there are situations when setting the highest standard is important. I want my pharmacist to be fastidious when filling my prescriptions and pilots should be perfectionistic when evaluating a plane’s airworthiness. 

But don’t let perfect become an enemy of good and done.

German artist Manfred Laber came up with a futuristic way to honor the 793 AD founding of the town of Wemding in the southern German state of Bavaria, which celebrated its 1,200th birthday in 1993. Laber designed a “Time Pyramid” made from concrete blocks, but neither he nor anyone living today will ever see it completed.

That’s because a new block is only added to the structure every 10 years—the fourth is expected to be placed in 2023—making the completion date around the year 3183. [From WiseGeek.com]

Granted, this is an extreme and inapplicable example of long-range planning, so let’s discuss the benefits of a more reasonable approach.

We often neglect long-term planning. Near-term problems, opportunities, and temptations monopolize our attention and we become nearsighted. We often get distracted by urgent tasks, but what is urgent is seldom important and what is important is seldom urgent. And we often focus on unimportant issues and neglect important ones—we’ll spend more time planning our upcoming weekend than our retirement.

On a regular basis, think about where you’d like to be in life 5, 10, or 20 years from now. Take a holistic approach to planning—develop goals and plans in many areas: financial, professional, family, intellectual, academic, spiritual, and social. Then make a plan to reach each goal and work your plan. It’s as simple as that. 

As you consider various plans, connect them to execution. A plan defines what you want to do; execution involves how you will do it). When execution is missing, plans decay into wishful thinking. 

Here are some simple but potent adages that apply to this conversation.  

• If you aim at nothing, you will always hit it. Always have goals you’re pursuing. Without them you’ll squander your time and energy.  
• He who aims for the stars shoots higher than he who aims for the trees. Even if you make stretch goals and don’t accomplish them, you’ll probably end up in a better place than if you aim too low. 
• We never drift anywhere that’s desirable. Without a pre-planned destination, we usually end up in a suboptimal place. Ten years from now you are going to be doing something, but if you don’t aggressively plan, you’ll drift to a mediocre place.

Goal setting works. Twenty-five years ago Mary and I developed a 12-year plan to get out of debt. We did it in 10 years. Twenty years ago we set a goal to visit 60 countries before we die. Several months ago we added #48 — Qatar.

Getting started is easy: spend 60 minutes thinking about the rest of your life. Then do it again and often. When you have some potential options, share them with some friends and get their input. Then choose ones you want to pursue. Once you’re armed with a viable goal and plan, work your plan.

[Note to leaders: Ironically, organizational long-range planning has become difficult. In the marketplace, major changes come so rapidly that long-term plans can quickly become obsolete. Some leaders even question the value of organizations planning 20-30 years ahead because if you forge a 20-year plan, commit major resources to it, and aren’t able to adopt and change quickly, the plan can lead you astray. That’s why many leaders now consider “long-term” to be 4-6 years, with plans updated every six months.]  

Ecclesiastes chapter three is a good commentary on time. The first sentence is: There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens. Then it lists 14 situations in which we often must choose between two legitimate but opposite actions. For example, there’s a time to plant and a time to uproot, mourn and dance, pursue peace or make war. There is a proper time for each action.  

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about the following phrase (which is one of the 14 mentioned) and trying to incorporate it into my life: There’s a time to be silent and a time to speak.

It’s an important life lesson and necessary people skill. When obeyed it brings peace; when ignored it creates problems.

There are at least two ways to disregard this advice.

Sometimes we speak when we should remain silent.

Do you filter your thoughts before they become speech? Some people don’t. They assume that just having a thought is reason enough to verbalize it. When left unchecked, they feel free to say everything they think. This is not good. 

Before you speak, ask yourself:

• Is this the right time to speak?
• Is this the right place to speak?
• Have I considered my audience?
• Is what I’m about to say true? Necessary? Beneficial?
• Will my words contribute to the conversation?
• Will my words be redundant?
• Are my words necessary?
• When I speak, am I succinct or verbose?

Incorporating these eight filters would greatly reduce and refine our speech. 

Sometimes we don’t speak when we should.

Remaining mute when we should speak is also problematic. Often, it takes both discretion and courage to speak up.

• When you see injustice or unfairness, speak.
• When an important decision is being made, contribute your thoughts.
• Don’t be mute when your silence could be construed as agreement and you don’t concur with what is being said. 
• If someone is dominating the conversation, start talking and pursue equal time. (I dislike unbalanced conversations.)
• When someone is being dogmatic about his opinions (politics, religion, current events), express your own. 
• When someone says something that is verifiably wrong, correct him or her.

If it’s not obvious whether you should speak or be silent, it’s probably best to remain mute.

To speak or not to speak… When you’re unsure, it’s better to err on the side of silence. It’s hard to retract words spoken, and you can always speak later.  

Personal assessment — Do you struggle more with speaking too much or not speaking enough?

When I was young I was out of balance in that I was too quiet. In the past ten years I’ve tried to speak out more often. But lately, I’ve had to remind myself to hold my tongue and be silent. 

This is a never-ending challenge that we will calibrate and fine-tune for the rest of our lives.

Sometimes, a single incident is wrongly used to support a large claim. Or a small number is used to substantiate a major conclusion. The media and politicians are particularly guilty of this. 

For instance:

• There are 600,000 pastors and priests in America. Don’t discount all clergy because a few are dishonorable. 
• There are 800,000 law enforcement officers in America. A few may be “bad cops” but that should not influence your opinion of all officers or inordinately affect public policy.
• During the 2021 racial protests, some radicalized criminals (don’t call them protestors) vandalized property and injured others. Don’t confuse those individuals with those who engaged in peaceful protests and marches.
• The AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine was sidelined because it caused blood clots in a few people. But as of May 2021, 25 million people have received that vaccine and only 18 of those have died of blood clots. The vaccine has been proven to be 79% effective at preventing symptomatic COVID and was 100% effective in stopping severe disease and hospitalization. (The rate for getting blood clots from taking birth control pills is much higher: about 0.3% to 1%)

Let’s do some math.

• .01% of a million is 100
• .001% of a million is 10
• .0001% of a million is 1

So if .001% of police officers in America are corrupt, there are 79 corrupt officers and 799,921 honorable ones. Given those odds, I’m going to respect, trust, and support police officers (but let’s continue to prosecute those who abuse their power and position).  

As I’ve said before, be cautious and dubious about media sources that use a single incident to suggest a systemic problem or trend. Don’t trust conclusions based on small sample sizes.