Everyone does not report to everyone. Responsibilities and authorities are assigned to individuals based on assessments of their ability to handle them. #principleoftheday (1/4)
People are given the authority that they need to achieve outcomes and are held accountable for their ability to produce them.
At the same time, they are going to be stress-tested from both directions--i.e., by those they report to and by those who report to them. (2/4)
The challenging and probing that we encourage is not meant to second-guess their every decision but to improve the quality of their work over time. (3/4)
The ultimate goal of independent thinking and open debate is to provide the decision maker with alternative perspectives. It doesn't mean that decision-making authority is transitioned to those who are probing them. (4/4)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Whenever there is a dispute, both parties are required to have equal levels of integrity, to be open-minded and assertive, and to be equally considerate. #principleoftheday (1/4)
The judges must hold the parties to the same standards and provide feedback consistent with these standards. (2/4)
I have often seen cases in which the feedback wasn't appropriately balanced for various reasons (to hold the stronger performer to a higher standard, to spread the blame). This is a mistake. The person in the wrong needs to receive the strongest message. (3/4)
It is the rare dispute that is resolved to both parties' equal satisfaction. Imagine you are having an argument with your neighbor about a tree of theirs that has fallen onto your property. Who is responsible for its removal? #principleoftheday (1/11)
Who owns the firewood? Who pays for the damage? While you might not be able to resolve the disagreement yourselves, the legal system has procedures and guidelines that allow it to determine what's true and what to do about it... (2/11)
...and once it renders its judgment it's done, even if one of you didn't get what you wanted. That's just the way life is. (3/11)
There will come a point in all processes of thinking things through when you are faced with the choice of requiring the person who sees things differently from you to slowly work things through until you see things the same way... #principleoftheday (1/5)
...or going along with the other person, even though their thinking still doesn't seem to make sense. I recommend the first path when you are disagreeing about something important and the latter when it's unimportant. (2/5)
I understand that the first path can be awkward because the person you are speaking to can get impatient. To neutralize that I suggest you simply say, "Let's agree that I am a dumb shit but I still need to make sense of this, so let's move slowly to make sure that happens." (3/5)
When they're at odds, you should work hard to resolve the disagreement.
If you are about to make a decision that the believability-weighted consensus thinks is wrong, think very carefully before you proceed. #principleoftheday (1/4)
It's likely that you're wrong, but even if you're right, there's a good chance that you'll lose respect by overruling the process. (2/4)
You should try hard to get in sync, and if you still can't do that, you should be able to put your finger on exactly what it is you disagree with, understand the risks of being wrong, and clearly explain your reasons and logic to others. (3/4)
I regularly see people ask totally uninformed or nonbelievable people questions and get answers that they believe. This is often worse than having no answers at all. Don't make that mistake. #principleoftheday (1/4)
You need to think through who the right people are. If you're in doubt about someone's believability, find out.
The same is true for you: If someone asks you a question, think first whether you're the right person to answer it. (2/4)
If you're not believable, you probably shouldn't have an opinion about what they're asking, let alone share it.
Be sure to direct your comments or questions to the believable Responsible Party or Parties for the issues you want to discuss. (3/4)
I admired Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as he was a principled man with great principles. The few that come to mind that are especially relevant at this time are:
(1/7)
1. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
(2/7)
2. We must either learn to live together as brothers or we are all going to perish together as fools.