On a complex subject, could we ever reprimand a decision-maker even though the decision was good? The answer is yes! What are the questions to ask when evaluating a decision on a complex subject? Should we evaluate the content of the decision (results obtained) or the process that led to the decision (tools and methods used)? Common sense would lead us to answer that we must evaluate both, but I argue that this is a mistake.
The longer you live, the more experience you accumulate: You are confronted with many situations and you observe the consequences of one action rather than another. It is thanks to experience that we are able to anticipate: to see things before they happen like an accident, a danger or a disaster, or to be able to say that 3 elements together will produce a certain result. Intuition is fed by experience. A good intuition is often equal to good experience.
We all got a taste of mandatory and widespread teleworking during the pandemic. Few of us were happy with 100% teleworking for weeks on end because we are social beings, but we all discovered some benefits. About 10% of employees want everything back as it was before. Another 10% do not want to come back to the office. The rest dream of a world in which there is teleworking to a greater or lesser extent.
Here is a manifesto of benevolence which can be summarized in 3 words to ensure employee wellbeing on a daily basis:
No public criticism
In any kind of meeting, publicly criticizing someone’s ideas can be humiliating or hurtful: “I don’t agree because…”; “It’s not a good idea because…”; “Yes, but…”: yes, your idea is interesting, but not so interesting because…