"Get it all" is a nice/noble/useful/cool sentiment, but I think this usage overloads an established metaphor.
The whole point of the triangular metaphor (as a visualisation) is to communicate a compromise situation - e.g. I'm working on a project, you can have Quality, Cost, Time as dimensions - you can't max out one without compromising another.
I was just thinking about the same thing, although my attributes were: Time, Money, Passion (the things which a job should reward you with / what you will invest in a job).
10 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 44.0 ms ] threadWhich begs the question... what else can be brilliantly visualised using radar charts like this?
The whole point of the triangular metaphor (as a visualisation) is to communicate a compromise situation - e.g. I'm working on a project, you can have Quality, Cost, Time as dimensions - you can't max out one without compromising another.
While growth - cash - love model helps decide self picked projects, TOP advises employer - employee equilibrium in assigning resources to projects.
At any point of time an employer has to ensure that at least 2 of these are valid in a resource assignment for any task/project.
But hey, pseudoscience sells. Makes the reader feel smart when he "figures it out".
2 out of 3 is what you should be aiming for.