"After every decision, event, or maneuver, those involved gathered around my chair on the bridge wing and critiqued it. Even if things had gone well, we sill analyzed them. Sometimes things go right by accident, and you are left with the dangerous illusion that it was your doing. We documented what we were trying to do, how we did it, what the conditions and variables were, and how we could improve the process in the future." -- Captain Abrashoff
Does anyone else react to this by thinking "who has time to do that"? On the other hand, follow-up in the short run saves time in the long run. In my line of work numerous ideas re-surface in about a 10 year cycle. Critiquing the original idea in detail would spare abundant re-invention down the road. Perhaps more importantly, it takes vulnerability (i.e. humility) for a leader to open himself to critique like this -- the kind of humanity that followers crave.
No comments:
Post a Comment