by Daniel Davies

During my general Internet browsing I discovered Social Media is a Billion Small Stories via Podnosh. An excellent little show by Seth Goldstein, but there was something on slide 15 that almost choked me.

Put speed over perfection: "Get something out there. Do it, even if it isn't perfect"

Maybe I am taking this out of context (feel free to correct me), I couldn't agree with this less. I accept sometimes its impossible to get what you want out there exactly how you want in a given time, but to sacrifice quality is not an option. When balancing speed vs. perfection its often better to reanalyse your goals and reduce your quantity. Determine your primary goals, what it is you're trying to do and do that as well as you can, without compromising your perfection. The other bits around it can come later, at an equally high quality, but in a more appropriate time.

Talk about Perfection Should not be Compromised

Got something to say? Leave a comment!

A picture of Nick Booth

re: Perfection Should not be Compromised

Posted by Nick Booth

I think the speed over perfection encompasses a number of really useful principles. People used to mainstream media often fail to use media in a social way. They apply the principles of completeness, of needing to be right, of being aloof from their audience.

By encouraging them to relax and just get things up there you are helping them understand that you can put things right, apologise or improve as you go along if you so wish.

More importantly the incompleteness that comes from not seeking to perfect gives you audience room to get involved. The expert who just bungs up a half formed thought (and asks what do you think) is being much more social than one who keeps silent until they are sure they have it right then.

So I think you concern about this is wholly wrong!

A picture of Daniel Davies

re: Perfection Should not be Compromised

Posted by Daniel Davies

Thanks for the comment Nick. I can appreciate your point, but I think what I'm struggling to understand is how you can justify the expense of change? Putting things right is a very expensive process from my experience, not just talking financially either.

The approach I suggest of cutting back the amount you deliver and doing a smaller amount right still provides you with the points you have mentioned. By reducing the amount delivered your audience has lots of room to get involved, and I may even argue more. This is because the base upon which your idea goes forward is solid. An idea of iteratively developing ideas and release early, release often.

I fully agree that things do not need to be complete, I just don't understand why that needs to reduce the quality of something thus putting the long terms costs up, and why the approach I suggest is any less "social"?

A picture of Nick Booth

re: Perfection Should not be Compromised

Posted by Nick Booth

I think culturally these are different ideas. "Good enough" and "let's get on with it" can be considerably more efficient, practical and effective than perfectionism.

Got something to say? Leave a comment!

Contact Daniel…

Request a Quote