The Hidden Harm Of Punishments - Deepstash

deepstash

Beta

deepstash

Beta

This is How Effective Leaders Move Beyond Blame

The Hidden Harm Of Punishments

To extract a full account of the incident, remove blame and punishment on an organizational level from your retrospectives. You get there easier by reducing the fear and biases that creep in during the investigation of failures, and by choosing reconciliation and immunity over retribution.

Often, the conditions that lead to the negative outcome would still be there even if you removed the guilty individuals. And if the guilty are fired, you lose those who are better placed to help you learn from the incident.

71 SAVES


This is a professional note extracted from an online article.

Read more efficiently

Save what inspires you

Remember anything

IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:

This is How Effective Leaders Move Beyond Blame

This is How Effective Leaders Move Beyond Blame

https://firstround.com/review/this-is-how-effective-leaders-move-beyond-blame/

firstround.com

6

Key Ideas

Don’t Trade Context For Convenience

Blame and biases — such as hindsight bias — give us a convenient story about what happened in any negative situation. To the extent that a story feels comfortable, we believe that it's true but when we get to that convenient point we stop learning.

Skipping the learning process alleviates the discomfort of dealing with complex systems, but it costs in the long-term because you ignore the context of the incident and don’t address areas of fragility. 

Postmortems vs Learning Reviews

Most companies conduct postmortems at a project’s end to analyze and outline the factors that contributed to its failure. But this reflection, examination and evaluation might not be as useful as most wait for failures to conduct them and stop the analysis once the guilty are identified.

Failures don't happen frequently enough to learn at the rate that’s needed to really thrive in a competitive environment. Learning reviews, on the other hand, aim to gather information and can be conducted after each experiment or iteration allowing improvements regardless of successes. 

Setting Context To Maximize Learning

  • Repeatedly remind your team that they’re part of a learning organization to make them focus on learning.
  • Remind your people that you are all operating within complex systems, thus failures can be unpredictable.
  • Failure is a normal part of the functioning of complex systems.
  • Seek to understand what goes wrong and what goes right, to make more resilient systems.
  • Look for the conditions that allowed a particular situation to manifest, and accept that not all of them are knowable or fixable.
  • Human errors are a symptom of trouble within the system, not the cause. 
  • Educate everyone on cognitive biases and keep an eye out for them.

Build a Timeline

A timeline is an account of what happened by the people who were involved and impacted. Create a timeline with input from as many people from diverse points of view. With some training, anyone in the organization can do it.

A good timeline shows not just what happened, but serves as a reference point to keep the review on track. It should capture what people were thinking at the time it was happening instead of reflecting what happened from the biased perspective of the present.

Achieving Closure

  1. Determine and rank the steps that should be taken to change the conditions that brought the incident in the first place.
  2. To keep the learning review focused, prioritize and discuss these action items in separate follow-up meetings with the relevant people.
  3. The facilitator must publish the learning review write-up as widely as possible. Both successes and failures should become part of institutional memory.
  4. If the incident negatively impacted people, consider using the 3 Rs to structure the writeup. The Rs stand for ‘Regret, Reason, and Remedy’ as it provides a straightforward formula for a meaningful, satisfying apology.

EXPLORE MORE AROUND THESE TOPICS:

SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:

Biases...
Biases...

... specifically cognitive biases, are your unchecked tendencies to make decisions or take actions in an irrational way. 

Instead of making decisions based on facts and data, you ...

Biases = shortcuts for processing information

The brain creates shortcuts in order to make fast decisions when it hits information or inspiration overload

These shortcuts form unconscious biases so it’s easier for your brain to categorize information and make quick judgments over and over again.

Self-serving Bias
It causes you to claim your successes and ignore your failures. 

This means that when something good happens, you take the credit, but when something bad happens, you blame it on external factors.

Self-serving bias may manifest at work when you receive critical feedback. Instead of keeping an open mind, you may put up a defense when your manager or team member is sharing feedback or constructive criticism.

6 more ideas

Strong company cultures

Companies need to create cultures centered on employees. Strong cultures create effective working teams that attract top talent, while weak cultures can quickly lead to burnout or employees heading...

Building meaningful company cultures
  • Build trust through transparency.
  • Foster healthy connection.
  • Lead by example
  • Incorporate fun into the day job.
The ABCDs of categorizing decisions
The ABCDs of categorizing decisions
  • Big-bet decisions: infrequent and high-risk - from major acquisitions to game-changing capital investments;
  • Cross-cutting decisions: frequent and high-risk - think pricin...
Approaching big bet decisions
  • Appoint an executive sponsor to work with a project lead to frame important decisions for senior leaders to weigh in on;
  • Break things down (with decision meetings at each stage), and connect them up.
  • Focuses on debating the solution (instead of endlessly elaborating the problem) and gather the right people.
  • Move faster without losing commitment: get comfortable living with imperfect data and being clear about what “good enough” looks like.
Approaching cross-cutting decisions
  • Identify decisions that involve a cross-cutting group of leaders, and work with the stakeholders of each to agree on what the main steps in the process entail.
  • Work through a set of real-life scenarios to pressure-test the system in collaboration with the people who will be running the process.
  • Limit the number of decision-making bodies, and clarify for each its mandate, standing membership, roles etc.
  • Create shared objectives, metrics, and collaboration targets.

one more idea