The very healthy balance between planning and executing
We always find that startups can pull off miracles. We see how they were able to be creative around their solutions, paving the way for their minimum-viable product (known as ‘MVP’), and raise some funds to keep perfecting their craft.
This sounds like the result of having a good balance of planning and executing.
This balancing act is not simple.
At all.
Most of the time there are opposing forces: the force that wants to execute and figure the path as it unravels in order to see progress, and the force that wants to plan ahead of the path and mitigate risks in order to be more efficient.
This clearly creates tension between both forces. One wants to act and then plan. The other wants to plan and then act. Depending on your nature, one will make more sense than the other.
Both work extraordinarily well when alternated.
Ideally, there’s a ‘de-militarized zone’ between the two. A safe space where both forces can interact and find out how solid their ground is.
Are the executives acting impulsively or confidently? Do they know something that the planners don’t? Have they shared this with the team to level the information playing field? Is the tunnel vision of the executives one that is based on focus rather than on carelessness?
Similarly, are the planners seeing risks that the executives are overseeing? Is it muscle memory more than an actual real risk that they want to plan around? Is this initiative one that requires a well-defined path or is it more of a ‘nice to have’?
We’ll leave it at this balanced thought from one of the great:
“A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. ”
