Unintended Consequences: Look Before You Leap
For every
action, there are innumerable possible reactions (with apologies to Sir Isaac
Newton). This is a basic law that
applies to virtually every decision you and your teams make. That’s why it’s important to consider the big
picture before you take action. What
appears to be a solution to a local problem can have unanticipated
ramifications on a larger scale. For
example, I ran an institution that was composed of many satellite units. Every decision made at the corporate, central
level had an impact on the operations at those satellite locations. On more than one occasion (many more) I
received calls from the field asking what idiot made a particular call on
business operations. Whoops, that would
be me. For instance, centralizing all HR
functions was a great cost-saving move for the organization. But it was incredibly inefficient for local
operations that needed the ability to move quickly in hiring staff. And inefficiency comes with a cost attached.
In this
case, the error was structural. We
needed to be sure that proposed organizational changes were reviewed by a
committee that had representation from field locations. That seems like a
no-brainer, but you would be surprised how easy it is to overlook the obvious. And
this committee kept us from making similar goofs on any number of occasions.
Another time
a manager came to me with a plan to eliminate a particularly troublesome
employee. He was simply going to
eliminate the position that the employee filled—problem solved! Wrong.
I pointed out to him that his unit contained several positions identical
to the one he proposed doing away with.
That being the case, if a position were to be eliminated, he would need
to dismiss the person with the least tenure, other things being equal. In fact, the person he wanted to do away with
was the longest tenured, was age-protected, and was a protected minority. That being the case, to accomplish his goal
he would need to eliminate the entire set of positions at that level. That, of course, was not his plan at
all. He finally conceded that the damage
he would inflict was not worth the benefit of having the employee gone.
This same
principle plays out in a variety of scenarios where parity and impartiality
must be maintained, for example in compensation determinations. In both cases,
the lesson for leaders is the same. Look
before you leap. Know how deep the water
is before you dive.
Comments
Post a Comment