When good enough isn’t good enough
Teams and organisations trapped in ‘good enough’ thinking create their own performance ceiling.
It starts innocently enough - missing project deadlines by a few days; accepting first-draft solutions instead of exploring better alternatives; celebrating completion over excellence; or (new for 2025!) using AI to complete work without peer reviewing the outputs.
The psychology behind the mindset is seductive: good enough feels safe, reduces conflict, removes another thing off the list and as a result, requires less emotional investment. Yet, what I see in my work is that ‘good enough’ is cultural quicksand.
The quality of results suffers, performance gets stuck and people get dragged down.
High-performing teams understand that ‘good enough’ is often the enemy of success. They've learned that raising standards doesn't increase pressure, it increases pride and commitment.
In my experience, these teams deliberately cultivate discomfort with mediocrity through:
Rigorous peer review that challenges assumptions and quality
Post-task analysis that asks ‘how could this be 5% better?’
Celebrating ambitious attempts that fall short over safe successes
Creating space for big ideas before settling on sensible ones
Measuring impact, not just output
Sharing ownership of collective team reputation
When teams stop accepting good enough, extraordinary becomes possible and the goals that felt unachievable before, now become the new baseline.
