Half vs Full Measure

I was recently watching the TV series “Breaking Bad” and there was an episode called “Half Measure”. The story basically highlighted the error of choosing a half measure to deal with a problem rather than giving it the full measure.

Over the course of my career, I have witnessed many half measure “solutions” to problems and have admittedly implemented a bunch myself. I have found that this approach is often a tempting one that many choose to take before applying the full measure. By then, the damage is done and there is no way to fix the situation except to hope that the next time the decision comes around, one would choose the full measure.

Here’s an example:  A company wants to do a BIG marketing push to move the sales needle in a big way. However, the half measure of an offer of 5% off rather than something more sexy like 20% off (or more). The result? The marketing goals were not reached and all that money was spent on a direct mail campaign that did not perform as hoped cannot be recouped.  

Here’s another example: A company’s top sales person was often tardy, talked back to the supervisor and took longer lunch/smoke breaks than allowed. Sales supervisor was beside herself and did not know the best course of action because this was her top sales person. After multiple warnings and half measures because the firm did not want to lose their top sales person, they finally decided to fire the employee (full measure) with much trepidation. The result? The rest of the sales team's morale improved and overall sales went up!

It can be very scary and painful to choose the full measure at times. Also, for reasons primarily related to keeping within a tight budget or risk averse tendencies, many managers choose the half measure thinking it as a safer way to tackle problems. What they don’t consider is that if bombs out, then what they have done is wasted money in reality. And their next attempt could have the effect of a double-down which is higher risk than choosing the full measure the first time around.

One can argue that it’s a gamble either way. In many ways, I suppose that’s true. But if you’re going to gamble, why sit at the $1 black jack table and hope to win small amounts rather than sitting at the $50 black jack table with the same odds and having the chance to win in larger spades (no pun intended)? Is it better to slowly bleed to death by a thousand paper cuts than going to war with a sword and ready to do real damage (and take some hits)? 

I would argue that when we are about to select a half measure, it is recommended that we take a moment to think through the what-if scenarios to determine if a full measure would actually be the more prudent approach.