Trade-Offs and the Trap of Continuous Maximizing
A topic that has been coming up frequently in my circles relates to trade-offs.
Decisions come with trade-offs
While we can aim for win/win/win solutions, the reality is that oftentimes, decisions come with trade-offs. For example:
We might find ourselves pondering whether to live in the city —where we have more walkability to restaurants or coffee, or a bit further out of town with less walkability but more space.
We might find ourselves faced with a possible project opportunity that could be financially lucrative, but intensive on the team's time and resources.
Perhaps we are deciding between two opportunities —one that is highly aligned with our passions but that offers little flexibility, and another that isn't quite as strong of a match, but with ample flexibility or a hybrid work structure.
Or, perhaps we have a candidate in our pipeline who could bring a necessary skillset and a new perspective, but who is a bit of a wildcard when it comes to “culture fit.”
As someone who can be a maximizer rather than a satisficer when it comes to big decisions, it can be tempting to continually work toward the most optimal solution, even if that means questioning or revisiting a decision that has already been made.
A COUPLE TIPS
Two things that I've found helpful:
Being clear on where it makes sense to be a maximizer, and where it's okay to be a satisficer - for me, this typically means maximizing big decisions, and taking referrals at face value from trusted sources for smaller, everyday decisions (satisficing).
Considering the question: which of these trade-offs am I okay with?
Questions to consider
Am I a maximizer or a satisficer?
What trade-offs am I currently navigating? Of these trade-offs, which am I okay with?
What could it look like to run my current decisions through the lens of values, priorities, and any other decision filters I've come up with?
