Four Levels

There are really only four classifications for any experience:

- Unacceptable
- Barely Acceptable
- Good
- Great

Levels of "unacceptable" aren't important to an outsider. It doesn't matter if something is absolutely terrible or slightly icky; either way, the experience wasn't good enough and shouldn't be repeated.

Barely acceptable is, unfortunately, pretty standard. This is where most businesses and individuals end up the majority of the time. This is survival. Short-term thinking at its finest.

Good is what most brands strive for, and most are able to achieve it occasionally. Big, successful organizations tend to fall in this category.

Great is rare. Unfortunately, most don't even try to get there. Or, they delude themselves to think that their level of "Good" is actually "Great".


Of course, these are all relative. And the only real definition of any of these terms is whatever the audience says it is.


Thinking about these four level of "okay-ness", what's the difference? What makes any experience fit within one rather than another?

I think it comes down to four things.
- Capability (obviously). What tools, experience, and assistance can a brand or person call upon?
- Attention to detail. Are they aware of the little things, and are they at least trying to address them?
- Caring. For those presenting the experience, is it a chore, a burden, a pleasure, or a calling?
- Time perspective. Is the focus on short term "let's just get through this" thinking or long term "where are we going with this?" thinking?