Making an informed decision seems like a good plan. I think most companies would look favorably
on employees that decide to do that. It
seems like a mature, thoughtful response.
In school, I was involved in a pretty good food fight in the
cafeteria. Mashed potatoes were thrown
onto the walls in our attempts to create art.
The school did not think it the best use of the food, especially when it
moved from walls to people. It was one
of the rare times I was brought to the principal’s office (I was usually not
caught for the stuff I did, not because I was angelic). Because I had my own skin to protect (from my
dad!), I found a way to present information that not only removed any
malevolent thought of me, but actually made me sound like a good guy operating
in the fallen humanity of school.
Brilliant? Yes. True?
Ummmmmmmmmmmmm.
What if the information is flawed?
It’s probably due to a few possibilities. One – perhaps there is a gap in the way
information is gathered. Maybe there are
some steps that have been bypassed due to ignorance. In our efforts to be efficient, we can forego
communication steps and not look back. Maybe we didn't know the process or all of the people involved. We can easily
assume some “facts” and fill in the blanks ourselves. It’s not what we would like to do, I know,
but the pressure of getting things done cause us to create shortcuts.
Have you ever been in a meeting where you offer a
perspective as an absolute, only to find out that most of the room knows
pivotal details? And now you look like
an absolute idiot? Yeah, it’s never
happened to me…I feel badly for you people (an obvious lie if you’ve ever been
in a room with me!).
Secondly, the informed decision may be colored by
self-esteem issues. Crazy as it may
seem, but there might be among those with whom we work a person or two who are
devastated when they are not the founts of information. To that end, they might offer bits and pieces
of information so as to try to coax out the rest. When bits and pieces fly around like that, it
leaves open inference and flawed interpretation. The decisions made would be based upon
granules rather than rocks of truth.
And then there’s political positioning. I have been in organizations where
communication is used based upon maligned purposes. There can be treachery and back-stabbing in
an organization with information sharing an easy road to
travel. I may only share what I want
others to know, with a longer term plan in place to paint someone in a bad
light, to make myself seem more important or to inflate the view of the
department I lead. Shocking, I know, but
it happens.
For those of us in an HR capacity, we have to be a bit more
eyes wide open about information. It is
a necessity for us to do our homework.
Cultural and relational impact is likely to occur from some of the
decisions to be made based on certain information. We can serve in an unbiased manner and gather
all of the facts. If we were to slip
into some of the posturing or sloppiness addressed above, we compromise our
role as a strategic partner to the overall health of the business.
Over the past few months, I have conversed with some
business owners whose experience with HR people has them characterized as
“mealy-mouthed” or “chatty Cathys.” What
a sad perspective. Is it really likely
that our informed decisions will be seen as informed decisions when the
impression we give falls into those categories? It’s not about our skin. It’s about our commitment to the senior
leadership team to deliver truth that will encourage growth and health for the
organizations we serve.
Really, what’s the worst that would have happened if I just
admitted to flinging a spoonful of mashed potatoes? Detention, cleaning it up, some
Philly-Italian-style parenting? You
gotta have something to go to therapy with, right?
