This is Goodhart's law in full effect, ofc. Unless you're in bureaucratic hell, processes exist for a reason. They're codified because they're believed to be leading indicators of quality outcomes, so folks are encouraged to follow them to help them do as good of work as possible
-
-
Show this thread
-
But accountability for results doesn't mean you have to always do good work as much as it means you have to make an honest effort to understand the root cause of your successes and failures.
Show this thread -
Success is about more than going through the motions. Sometimes you have good timing. Sometimes you have more resources or collaborators you gel better with. Sometimes you're just starting with a fundamentally idea or premise. Process alone won't guarantee you get there
Show this thread -
I've been on the wrong end of results-over-process plenty of times, but I still think accountability for process without accountability for results is a dangerous trap. You ideally want both, but having to answer for results keeps you from falling asleep at the wheel.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This entire thread is spot on
Process should be in service of results, & teams should be trusted to support outcomes.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I stopped getting upset at processes when I learned of "Safety regulations are written in blood"... Dumb procedures often exist because something bad enough happened a rule was made. Now I tend to explain/ask for history and see if a re-eval is neededhttps://www.youtube.com/user/USCSB/videos …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seriously, where can I pre-order this book that you are writing?! The conciseness captured in your points are just
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

