The Good, Fast, Cheap triangle looks like this:
Everyone at the General Conference (GC) desires it to be good, fast and cheap. The fact of the matter is, that is not possible not just for the GC but for all of life. So within the proceedings of the GC, there are camps that are established based upon some underlying values. While we can debate the values, I would submit that these three values (good, fast, cheap) are just as good as any to understand what seemed to happen today at the first day of the General Conference. The reality is that with these three values, you can only have up to two at any one time.
At the GC, there are those who value this to be cheap and fast. The reality is that we would have a conference of low quality because decisions would be driven by speed and low cost. It would be a race to the bottom, like when we thought the Ford Pinto was a good idea.
There are those who desire the GC to be fast and good, but that is expensive. And that is an attractive way to operate. This is why the fastest cars on the market are also among the most expensive.
There are those who desire the GC to be cheap and good and that really takes time to create. It is like rebuilding a car that you bought for $300 from the junkyard. You can rebuild it and make it high quality, but it will take a lot of time.
Of the parings, it seems that it is the third group (the one that takes the most time) is the least desirable paring among the bulk of GC delegates. So that leaves the expensive option or the less quality option camps to come to an agreement.
As I heard the debate today, it dawned upon me that this tension between these three values may be just as valid of a reason to the gridlock we have found ourselves in. We want all three but can only have two. The question that I think about as I compose this reflection at 11pm is what two does God value?