Are you consistent, or are you flexible? They're not mutually exclusive qualities, but in certain circumstances I often find myself tending toward one or the other. Optimally, I find a sweet spot: I'm consistent, but not rigid. I'm flexible, but not ambiguous. And I can shift gears when necessary. But I don't hit that mark nearly as often as I'd like.
Yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle brought this to mind in an unexpected way–John Clark interviewed Peter Farrelly, the co-producer of The Ringer, a recent film set at the Special Olympics which features a number of actors with mental disabilities:
Q: So the [actors] with disabilities, was it tricky directing them?
A: There were two kinds. There were the kinds who would be meticulous. They would hit their spots and their lines every single time. But that is only three-quarters of acting. A lot of acting is on the day when you're shooting it, trying to make it better. Feeding new lines, trying a different way. Well, these guys couldn't go off it. And then there were the other kids who did it different every single time. They were making up their lines. So they each had a strength. We got a lot of great ad-libs from the second group. They would just kind of wing it. It was making the scene better, and it was pushing the other actors and did give it a reality.
That's a vivid illustration both of the strengths of each approach and of the problems that result when we can't switch from one mode to the other effectively. And it highlights the particular importance of flexibility: Consistency will allows me to achieve certain goals, but it's not enough if I hope to exceed them. Consistency is a starting point, a necessary but not sufficient condition. Excellence requires the ability to change, grow, create, respond differently–in a word, flexibility. I'm working on it.
2 Responses
Ed – great post. I agree with your view of excellence. Think about it from an organizational perspective. Suppose a company wants to be operationally efficient while also being innovative. One requires they drive out variation while the other requires they embrace it to find new combinations of potential value. They need to do both – and it’s really hard!
Hard for an organization, Ann Michael, and even harder for an individual. At least an organization can try to build in both competencies through their hiring and team-building practices. But your point is a good reminder that the important stuff usually isn’t easy 😉