I think that it is exponentially harder to attain three diverse elements simultaneously vs. striving to achieve just two, yet people try to do it all the time.
For example:
> Finding clothes that 1) you like, 2) fit well and 3) are within the right price range. There are plenty of clothes that I like and that fit, but are way out of my price range. I also have seen many sale items that I like, but are in the wrong size. And I have also tried on more than one outfit where the price and fit were right, but it just “wasn’t me.”
> Hunting for a house that 1) is in the right neighborhood, 2) has the right features and 3) is available for sale. Many houses you drive by would be good on two accounts, but not all three (or they meet 1 & 2, but not your budget.)
> Trying to recruit athletes who 1) play the position you need, 2) have the credentials to play and 3) are interested in your team/school. If they play very well, the interest in non-prestige schools will wane, leaving a coach to find someone of lesser ability who is excited for the opportunity to play for the team.
> Looking for a new job that 1) aligns with your skills, 2) is in an acceptable location and 3) provides a positive work culture. There may be great jobs for you out-of-state or you may find a local mission-driven company with no openings in your area of expertise, but aligning the job/company/location is a challenge.
> Selecting a puppy that 1) is a big dog, 2) is good with kids and 3) doesn’t shed terribly. Thus the rise of hybrids as Mother Nature did not provide many options with this trio.
Achieving the illusive trinity makes its achievement all that much more sweet, but does require more effort and strategy. If you want to hold out for where all three elements align, develop your plans to find “the three,” not the “two plus one.” The pool will be smaller, but you’ll hit the trifecta if you find it.
— beth triplett
leadershipdots.blogspot.com
@leadershipdots
leadershipdots@gmail.com
This one struck close to home for me. When casting local plays, I often look for actors who 1) have the right look for the part, 2) have the talent to play the part well, 3) and have the temperament to cooperate with other actors during the long six to eight weeks of rehearsals and usually two weeks of performances.
Either I get someone who is 1 and 2, but not 3 (if they misbehave too much, they go on my personal “do not cast ever again” list); I get someone who is 2 and 3 (and we pretend the script called for an actor who looks like the one we got); or I get someone who is 1 and 3 (then it’s rough going trying to get an often very attractive and agreeable but mildly talented person to a level where audiences will be able to stand watching them perform).
Many times, I have been able to cast someone who is 1, 2 AND 3, because during the past decade, I’ve developed my intuition about talent and temperament — and I vet the actors who audition with other actors and directors whose opinions and experiences I respect.
Glenn Farr