Have you ever sent a request to a colleague or a staff person and then lost track of it wondering “Where does that stand? Did he ever get back to me on that?” Have you ever delegated a task and wondered if the performer was really committed to fully doing it? Ever made a task request of someone who never responded? Ever come out of a meeting with some good ideas tossed around and heads nodding that we should do “X” only to realize afterwards that no one actually took ownership and nothing is going to get done?
We all have had these too common experiences in our modern work world. These are just the extreme examples. Some of the more usual ways we all respond to work requests are captured in the following phrases: “I’ll see what I can do about that”, “I’ll get back to you later”, “OK, I’ll add it to my list of tasks”, “I’m really busy right now, but I’ll do my best”, etc. As I discussed in my last article, we work in a “best efforts” paradigm. Throughout all business sectors and across all company sizes these are the work norms that have been created and perpetuated.
It is easy to understand why. Employees and companies really do want to satisfy their internal and external customers. We are culturally programmed to say “Yes” to requests; saying “No” is uncomfortable and may squelch future requests or business opportunities. As requesters, we resist coming across as domineering or too serious while as performers, we never want to deliver late, so deadlines are often kept soft or vague. Making firm promises to do something is reserved for private matters rather than business.
These norms have worked for a long time. So what’s the problem?
The problem is that they also do not work most of the time. Or viewed another way, these norms have hidden inefficiencies and costs that keep people and organizations from performing at peak levels. Because we all know and understand the realities of these norms, requests require a large amount of follow-up (even nagging some times). We do not really trust people to get things done. Systems, corporate practices, and individual behaviors are established to check up and report back. The rate of failed projects is very high, not because the planning was poor, but because the communication was poor. There are real costs associated with these work norms and behaviors.
Many requests, in fact, are made which are never completed due to what can be called “the Pocket Veto”.
Bill is asked to do seven tasks by three different people. He has told all three requesters that he will “do his best”. He then goes about choosing how many and which of the tasks he will actually do and by when. Two of Mary’s requests will never get done; Bill may have even known this at the time the requests were made, but he allowed Mary to expect he would complete her requests.
The performer is actually declining some of the requests, but the requesters never really find out which ones. Think for a minute about the inefficiencies Bill creates in Mary’s world by this behavior. The Pocket Veto leads to surprises, usually very late in the game.
Virtually all organizations today are afflicted to some degree with the costs and inefficiencies of these work norms. A growing number of case studies show that changing these norms has a direct and nearly immediate impact on improving an organization’s performance. This paradigm shift is called “Commitment or Promise-based Management”. The practices associated with this relatively new management theory lead to clearer accountability, better visibility into execution, increased employee engagement, and more trust. These ideas are starting to gain a foothold in today’s management circles, and we here at 4 Spires are doing our part to advance the conversation.