One thing I am realizing as I advance in my career:
The difference between good and great is not as large as people pretend it is.

It's little things. That runner who runs 5 miles instead of 4, that extra 30 seconds to proofread a communication, putting your own personal bar just that little bit higher. More importantly I've noticed in great people, when they reach this high bar, they don't settle, they raise the standards again. That 5 miles becomes 6, or 10. That 98% satisfaction becomes 99%.

Look at people like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk people love to gush over. The difference between them and others is just a higher standard and an unwillingness to compromise that standard. That little extra push right at the end when most people give in and settle. A willingness to say "no, that's not good enough, we can do better."

Best analogy I've heard recently was in relation to a diet. Some people, when they've lost 18 of 20 lbs, make a choice to cheat and eat a candy bar, setting themselves back. Others eat an apple and go running to achieve their goal faster.

Be the runner in that last push and reach your goal with pride and speed.

Now when you get down to managing people there is a right and a wrong way to do this. Obviously Jobs was known for being on the poor end of personal motivation so although his achievements were great, his methods were a bit questionable. I advise against temper tantrums and yelling.

The first step is to simply let the people working for you know what the standards are. If you are holding someone to a standard that exists nowhere but your head, it will lead to resentment. That was Jobs' mistake, and one I've made recently as well. Be clear and definitive in what you expect, and let it be known this standard is not optional.

Second step is to ensure the people you are holding to this standard have what they need to be successful. In IT it's easy to say "we need 100% satisfaction rating on tickets". If your helpdesk is overloaded and doesn't have time to take the care you want, they, and you, will fail. This is where proper metrics come in. You are what you monitor and what you prioritize.

Example: My support team monitors the usual Satisfaction, First response time, Follow up response time, Returns (number of interactions) etc. Satisfaction is the first metric on our report, the rest are on page 2+.

On my support team Satisfaction rating is everything. I make this well known. We track all the usual things but philosophically I, and they, understand that every other metric is a function of Satisfaction. Why is response time important? Because responding faster leads to more satisfied users. Why are fewer interactions on a ticket important? Because people are happier when they get a good answer the first or second time. We're monitoring for many things, but never lose sight of the fact only one of these things truly matters. Other metrics can slip, Satisfaction will not. The others are functions of the true metric, and simply indicators of when you need to hire to keep up with the demand, or find efficiencies and increase ticket deflection, but that's a different article :)

This applies to design as well. When the Sysadmins are evaluating software user satisfaction is first. Our ability to manage the software is second. Is this software going to make the people we are responsible for making productive able to do their work in the most efficient way possible?

Always, always maintain that high bar. You'll be surprised at what you can achieve.