The Law of Diminishing Returns: Why Perfection Hurts Productivity




Have ever spent hours tweaking something which was already at a very good standard? Upon reflection was your extra effort and time worth it? 

More often than not the pursuit of perfection is the enemy of productivity. At some stage the extra effort returns smaller and smaller benefits. 

Instead of chasing perfection, let's chase efficiency. 

Law of Diminishing Returns: Perfection v Productivity

The Law of Diminishing Returns means that the more time, effort, or resources you keep putting into something, the less extra benefit you get back. 

Have you ever tried to pour concrete? From my experience, the more you try to make it perfectly smooth the worse it gets. 

Or, If you spend one hour preparing for a presentation, the quality improves a lot. If you spend two hours, it gets even better. But if you spend ten hours obsessing over small details, the improvement is so small and does not actually change the nature of the presentation. 

How to overcome the Inefficiency of Perfectionism 


1. Set deadlines to complete tasks. Parkinson’s Law outlines that work expands to the time given. 

SET a limit → finish faster → move on.

2. Craig Groeschel has a saying GETMO (Good Enough to Move On). When working on a task ask yourself "is this good enough to move on?" 

"The pursuit of excellence will motivate you, but the pursuit of perfection will eventually limit you." - Craig Groeschel 

3. Identify the big tasks that create the most impact. See my blog on "Creating the Big 3" 

Caveat 

There is a caveat to this. If you're a surgeon, please aim for perfection. If you're bridge engineer, please don't think "close enough is good enough". 

Conclusion 


Remember perfection is the enemy of productivity.

GETMO isn’t about being sloppy — it’s about being strategic.

Next time you’re tempted to over-polish, ask yourself — is this good enough to move on?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Multitasking Fallacy

Image
  The Multitasking Fallacy  There should be a warning label every time someone attempts to multitask, especially if you belong to the species that has a Y chromosome.  Why is multitasking a fallacy? Simply, our brain is unable to focus on more than one thing at a time, this is especially true when the task requires cognitive effort. The prefrontal cortex only handles one complex process at a time.  What may feel like multitasking is our brain task switching , not multitasking.  The Hidden Cost of Multitasking  There is a " switch cost " that is paid when you switch focus. When you change focus your brain has to ‘reboot’ to grab all the necessary information relating to a task. The brain has to re-load context, priorities and outcomes.  Research shows that this can lead to significant decreases in efficiency because of this "switch cost".  Why the Warning Label?  Why do I believe there should be a warning label for "multitasking"? Attention Re...
Read more

Learn What the Sunk Cost Fallacy Is, Why We Fall Into It, and How to Avoid It: Sunk Cost Fallacy

Image
  What is the Sunk Cost Fallacy  The sunk cost fallacy occurs when an individual continues an endeavor solely because they’ve already invested resources—such as time, money, or energy—even though abandoning it would be the more rational and efficient choice. Why do we fall into the Sunk Cost Fallacy Trap?  We fall into the sunk cost fallacy because our decisions are driven more by emotion than logic. Fear of Loss: We are more scared of losses, than potential gains of walking away.  Failure: It is hard to admit that we might have failed. We might not want to face the fact that we were unwise previously.  Optimism Bias:  We become overly optimistic that things might turn around.  Emotional Attachment: The more effort we invest into something, the more we become emotionally attached. Famous Examples Sunk Cost Fallacy Concorde Project The most famous example of a sunk cost was the Concorde Project. The Concorde was a joint project by the British and French...
Read more