Saturday, October 15th, 2016
Short cuts have their own shortcomings. If a fruit takes certain number of days to grow, let that take its own time. By adding certain chemicals and fertilizers process may be hastened by few days but it can’t have same nutritional values and taste. In few circumstances short cuts may be beneficial but in most of the cases short cuts result into inferior quality of final product or services.
At the same time, it does not mean that we cannot cut down unnecessary time taking processes. Efficiency is important but it should not be at the cost of quality and intrinsic values. There is nothing wrong in taking shortest path but it should achieve same quality and output.
When you engage in “real” activity, you accomplish someting but also increase your capacity to perform. If you invest in the right activities, slowly and steadily, you become more valuable to the marketplace. Over years, you continue this practice and the marketplace places a premium on you.
On the other hand, take a shortcut and you lose twice. First, because rarely shortcuts succeed. The odds are against the ones taking the shortcuts. Second, every investment in a shortcut (before you take the shortcut fantasizing about the possible outcome if you succeed, during taking the shortcut, after taking the shortcut thinking about how cool it would have been if it paid off) robs of you of an opportunity to “build capacity for the future.”
Summing-up: The “real cost” of a shortcut is the loss of an opportunity to become better for the future. If it is too good to be true, it probably is. Have patience and do not interfere with natural processes.