Back in the day somebody told me I'm not good at details. I then spent years in architecture school slaving over the details so much that I think I'm now a fairly detail-oriented person. If you ask my loved-ones they will probably tell you that I am unbearable when it comes to details in life and work.
That's not to say I like DRAWING details. My mentor has a hard time getting me to draw details for construction documents. They are a pain in the butt, and just not for me. Sure, I'm good at detail-y type stuff now because I practiced SO MUCH. But, in architecture, detail drawings just don't float my boat.
In this other book I read recently called Business DISCoverY, one author promotes the idea of never doing things you aren't good at. He says we shouldn't waste time on tasks that we aren't suited for in "Don't Try to Get a Cow to Fly."
I really identify with this advice because no matter how many detail drawings I have drawn, it just doesn't light me up like other things parts of the business.
So, which school of thought would you agree with? Can there be just one right answer? Is some compromise really the best thing, or just a diluted way of being? I'm really curious because in most cases I go for the compromise, but here it seems like doing either one half-way seems like a waste of time.
Well, whatever the case is, I'm glad I went to that one BNI happy hour in Malvern, and won that book - Business DISCoverY - as a door prize. Winning a door prize is always a good thing.