I had a client once that grew something like 10x in 10 years.  Really impressive.  They were quite proud of that fact.  The dirty secret was that their market grew something like 15x in the same timeframe.  My client grew bigger, not better.  Their growth was a product of their timing and location.  The rising tide had indeed lifted their ship. 

I saw the same thing with a church once.  The new pastor had indeed come at the same time attendance increased.  But so had the new big box distribution center and factory.  The population of the 10 miles surrounding their facility had doubled since his arrival and the church had not. 

So I wondered, does it matter?  I mean, both organizations were able to serve more people.  Do they really need to keep pace with the population growth? 

No. They don't.  The challenge, and the reason I was involved, was to help parse out the difference between 'bigger' and 'better.'  The goal was to identify the difference so that they could prepare for future growth, knowing more distinctly that which the organization could control. 

To their credit, both organizations paused to ask the question.  One chose to take the 'reality pill' and acknowledge that their success was contingent upon the context and not exclusively due to their awesomeness.  The other continued to believe in their 'best in market' rankings. 

As people, the challenge is the same.  I talked to a guy once that thought he was a model of business excellence.  The reality is that he was a mid-level manager at the time his company went public and his stock options allowed him to retire at 55. 

The lesson is to know the difference between bigger or better.  One organization acknowledged market growth and focused their energies on getting better.  The other reveled in their success and, years later, is falling down the 'best of' rankings.

Only when we know the difference between 'bigger' and 'better' can we pull the appropriate lever in preparing for tomorrow.