How to Foresee the Foreseeable: Recognize Haste

Sometimes we're unaware that we're acting in haste, possibly because recognizing haste requires pausing to assess our condition. Still, recognizing haste is important, because haste, as they say, makes waste. But haste can do far more than make waste. Failure, bankruptcy, and threats to life and limb can follow, too, though not in every situation. Some signs of haste are obvious: the emergency meeting; sending out for dinner for everyone; or having people phone in from airports. But some signs of haste are more difficult to discern. A sampling:

Rescheduling meetings too close to deadlines

Decision quality can suffer when critical decision-making meetings are rescheduled from, say, a month before deadline to a day before the deadline. Cushioning intervals between decisions and deadlines make space for safety mechanisms.

For example, these intervals let us seek outside support such as advice, research, or references. A zero-cushion rescheduling can compel us to decide now, at the meeting, irrevocably, and that can prevent us from foreseeing the foreseeable.

Decisions require time, sometimes beyond the actual meetings at which they're drafted. Scheduling (or rescheduling) those meetings must take that time into account.

Delivering supporting exhibits late

If a decision depends on examining exhibits — documents, reports, experimental results, or other intelligence — and if delivery is late, decision makers might be unable to review the material adequately before the decision. They might be unable to grasp its full implications.

Making decisions on time despite late exhibit delivery could mean that scheduling is more valued than decision quality. In effect, to compensate for the late delivery, the decision makers are sacrificing time they need.

Determine Making decisions on time despite
late exhibit delivery could
mean that scheduling is more
valued than decision qualityin advance the minimum interval between exhibit delivery and the decision. Deciding about the minimum interval in the moment biases the group in favor of haste. Minimum intervals between deliveries and decisions might depend on the nature of the decisions.

New team member pressure

Sometimes, when new team members join a group, we feel compelled to proceed before they can become familiar with the issue at hand. Formally, the new members supposedly represent important constituencies or expertise, but that representation can be ineffective if familiarity with the immediate issue is limited.

Making group decisions with inadequate representation of important constituencies or expertise exposes the group to risk. Mere assignment to the team of someone with relevant attributes doesn't make that person capable of functioning as intended.

Establish criteria for team readiness before making critical decisions. As with exhibit delivery, the criteria might depend on the nature of the decision.

When the stakes are high, and both speed and decision quality are essential, lean toward quality. Make an agreement in your group that once the signs of haste are acknowledged, you'll take previously agreed-upon steps to limit the errors that haste can facilitate. Accept that you might have to decide in haste, but if you do, do it with eyes open.  Next in this series  Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

A Message Is Only a Message

When we receive messages of disapproval, we sometimes feel bad. And when we do, it can help to remember that we have the freedom to decide whether or not to accept the messages we receive.

Decisions, Decisions: II

Most of us have participated in group decision-making. The process can be frustrating and painful, but it can also be thrilling. What processes do groups use to make decisions?

How Not to Accumulate Junk

Look around your office. Look around your home. Very likely, some of your belongings are useless and provide neither enjoyment nor cause for contemplation. Where does this stuff come from? Why can't we get rid of it?

The Reification Error and Performance Management

Just as real concrete objects have attributes, so do abstract concepts, or constructs. But attempting to measure the attributes of constructs as if they were the attributes of real objects is an example of the reification error. In performance management, committing this error leads to unexpected and unwanted results.

How We Waste Time: II

We're all pretty good at wasting time. We're also fairly certain we know when we're doing it. But we're much better at it than we know. Here's Part II of a little catalog of time wasters, emphasizing those that are outside — or mostly outside — our awareness.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Problem Solving and Creativity for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings

Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.

And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I

Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenhCFEBgnGyUuTwxCwner@ChacZCydWDOHUjgzGOdqoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.