Will you allow me a little brag?

Carol Ptak really likes my blog. OMG! This is such a compliment to me, after all she co-authored "Necessary but not Sufficient" and she is enjoying reading ME?
Oh, the fulfillment. Oh, the meaningfulness (is this a legit word?). Oh, the utter horror of knowing I have such a standard to live up to. Nah, just kidding. I'm trying to be very natural in my writing and I totally enjoy doing it.
It is funny, though, we had a lecture about living a meaningful life, a subject Dr. Goldratt and his daughter, Efrat, covered in "The Choice". It was delivered by Christoph Lenhartz, who connected the process of clear thinking to the work of Viktor Frankl, the "father" of "Logotherapy". We were told there are three ways to create meaning in our lives - by what we create (giving to the world), by encountering people (getting from the world) and by our attitude towards unavoidable suffering. Well, I feel I just created meaning in both the first and second ways - through my writing and my (unbelievably fun) encounter with Mz. Ptak.

The III European TOCICO Conference

I just returned tonight from the conference. My head is still spinning from all the learning and insights I got. It was a very special experience for me and it will probably take me some time to completely process it.
Here are some quick "take away"s I noted down throughout the days:

• People have the means to live but not a meaning to live for - we are no longer fighting to survive, we are looking for a meaning
• We each create the meaning for ourselves, so it is our duty not to interfere or hinder or create obstacles to the ability of others to create their meaning (a tad more on meaning can be found here)
• Success (or failure) do not come from the uniqueness of the product but for the uniqueness of the product
• "Where there is a tail - there is a dog" (attributed to Eli Goldratt) this means that when all you see is a "tail" - a handful of clients with a special need there is a "dog" you don't see - a real market potential for a new offer
• Projects fail because time estimates become time commitments
• Analyze success (better than expected results), not just failure (below expectation results), it holds opportunities you can capitalize on, but only if you can understand them
• TOC implementation requires a paradigm shift, compromising drastically increases the possibility of failure of the implementation
• Win Win offers do not sell themselves, especially when the environment is saturated with suspicion and mistrust
• The conflicts of my clients are my conflicts
• The reason to really learn a subject matter is for improving it
• The bigger the base - the bigger the jump

Let me know if you'd like me to elaborate on any of these, or if there is any particular detail you'd like to know about the conference.

Satisficing

Theory of Constraint talks a lot about avoiding local optima, about maximizing the system and not its parts. This leads to road runner ethics, to making sure we are not trying to be more accurate than the noise in the system and so forth. The Theory of Constraints solutions tell us what to do at a good enough granularity. The rules are simple. Don't protect every step, protect the system by protecting the constraint, maintain flow. The tools are there. DBR and sDBR, CCPM, Logistics. So what's the problem?

The problem is there is still a void, although it seems to be just a verbal one. If we are not optimizing, if we are not "doing the best we can", than what are we doing? We can't just brush this off as being "just a verbal thing, just definitions", definitions are the starting point of clear thinking, as Dr Goldtratt taught us repeatedly.

There is another reason that makes this important. While the human logic can accept fuzziness, our subconsciousness can't, and that's where it counts the most, since most of our decision making is actually done there, at the most instinctive level. There are no voids in the subconscious mind and there are no gray areas. Like Master Yoda said in one of the Star War movies: "Do, or do not, there is not try". That's your subconscious mind for you.

So, for our subconscious mind not "doing the best we can" is, actually "not doing the best we can" or, if we'll put English grammar aside for a second, "doing NOT the best we can". Which sounds bad, doesn't it?
So, we really need a good name for not optimizing. That name, to me, should be "satisficing", a term I first heard during my MBA from Prof. Boaz Ronen, a TOC disciple in the academic world.
Satisficing means being good enough, not perfect. It has lots of merits. It reduces "analysis paralysis" and stress levels, allows for better flow through faster outputs  (I demonstrated this while discussing the hiring process here) and it sounds good.

What do you think?

Edited to add:
Following the replies I got here and on LinkedIn, I guess satisficing needs a bit more elaboration. Here's an easy example - say I have to prepare a birthday bash for a 6 years old and my goal is to make that 6 years old as happy as possible. I know I'll make a chocolate cake, cover it with chocolate cream and decorate it. Once the cake is ready I can make this cake:   decorated with M&Ms and a sugar paste "Happy Birthday". Time invested is about 1 hr and child is very happy.

On the other hand, I can make this cake: covered with sugar paste and decorated with sugar paste designs. Time invested 4-5 hrs (at least) and child is very happy, perhaps a bit more than with the first cake but not significantly so.

Both cakes are eaten up at about the same rate.


(yep, I made both of these cakes, and other "optimizer" cakes you can see here.There is room for hobbies in this wold, IMHO)

What we see is that I can go for a satisfactory cake or an optimal cake. The result, in goal units of child happiness, will not vary substantially, the only difference is the effort I put in. The first cake demonstrates satisficing - doing the necessary, the sufficient and nothing over that. The second cake demonstrates optimizing - doing the necessary, the sufficient and everything else, trying to be perfect.

One last thought (Thanks Henry for bringing it up) - whatever you do, it has to move you in the right direction. It is not enough to "do it right", you have to "do the right thing right"

I'd love to hear what you think about this.