Depending on where you are in the world, you can tell a server how you’d like your food. There are some vagaries. I’m in awe of many Stateside servers who confidently absorb a barrage of requests, edicts, or broader pronouncements. “Hold this, on the side for that, does it have X or Y oil? Did the animal receive its last rights from a Reiki Master?”
Don’t try that many other places (e.g., France) - the dish is the f’ing dish.
In a business setting, many of us are conditioned like American servers. The customer is ALWAYS right. That attitude is taken into in-house roles. Decrees from the board (or whomever you report to) are to be enacted. Bollocks.
The customer is not always correct. You’re the expert. If you’re head of risk, compliance, or something else important, you’re there for a reason. Enter the surgeon.
Not many of us would specify to the surgeon which scalpel they use for the life-saving brain surgery or if they could instead incise from left to right. We cede our right to control when we recognise the expertise of another.
If you’re wondering, “But how do I get colleagues to see the distinction?” Good question. Treat them like a kid - give them options. My dentist recently did this to me when they recommended a treatment, and I asked about the options:
👉 Option A: Over to you. Present a reality where they have to do MUCH more heavy lifting than they imagined and include all the bits they won’t know how to do. The outcome is uncertain; they take on considerable risk, which could be costly.
🦷 In the dentist’s example, “You live with it, follow this regiment, and hope for the best, but if the situation deteriorates, it’ll likely be much worse than intervening now with long-term complications.”
👉 Option B: Work together. An outcome you can live with but involves them and their input in controlled areas. It won’t “make their pain go away” like Option C, and they will have to live with some risk (for them personally/professionally).
🦷 We do some exploratory stuff. It might work, but it might also highlight a need for Option C, so you’d have to pay for Option B and C.
👉 Option C: Let me do my job (said more politely). There might be some pain/cost (list resources required), but in the end, you will have a robust and longstanding solution, so you can stop worrying.
🦷 Short-term pain, long-term solution. It is more costly and brutal than Option B, but statistically WAY better outcomes and longevity than that option.
If your colleagues see you as a server, help them see the folly - hopefully, this will make your life less painful than pulling teeth 😬.
Crowdsourcing vs. Crushing Compliance
You may have heard about the NASA study into “genius.” This blog summarises the study In essence, NASA needs geniuses to do the fantastic things they do. The good news is that, aged five, 98% of us are (were) geniuses. The bad news is that when we reach adulthood, that stat is flipped - a mere 2% of geniuses. In this study, genius was linked to creative problem-solving, and the findings suggest our educational systems are more purposed toward compliance than creativity. No shit.
As a regular visitor to the head teacher’s office (myself) and now on my son’s behalf (he again escaped the classroom to play in the fields this morning and refused to be wrangled), I see both sides. I imagine you do, too - your work is where “creative problem solving” meets compliance. There’s a hack here.
On the one hand, we need to encourage compliance (stop bad stuff), but many of our challenges are complex, requiring creative problem-solving. To straddle this apparent juxtaposition, we can crowdsource more. The concepts of “collective intelligence” are not new (the book, The Wisdom of Crowds may also help). When we pool our resources, we can outstrip the individual geniuses.
Now, I have a big problem requiring creative solutions. How to get my son to comply with all the bullshit I railed against while retaining that glint of possibility, hope, and adventure in his eye. All ideas are welcome!