Guest Post by Malcolm Peart (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)
Seeing eye dogs, or guide dogs, are so well trained that they know right from wrong. Even though their ‘master’ gives an order the trained canine won’t obey unless it’s safe; and that’s what we call intelligent disobedience. The dog is praised for exhibiting such behaviour. However, in corporate and project management circles, and despite the need for human intelligence enhanced through training, qualifications and experience, such behaviour is often branded as just plain disobedient.
Many organisations have some set of rules and regulations which govern expected norms of behaviour. They form part of an organisation’s culture and such ‘expectations’ become some form of ethical standard. Great…when there is ‘business as usual’. But in a crisis standard operating procedures tend not to apply. These situations, as well as people, can become heated and with heat can come fire and the tell-tale smoke that things aren’t quite right.
And when things aren’t ‘quite right’ it means that something is, or may become, ‘very wrong’. For some, following the rules is sacrosanct, after all if the rules aren’t broken then nobody will have done anything wrong…or have they? Some people look for rules and procedures and, in their absence any behaviour verges on insubordination as we have blind obedience. Organisations say they need initiative, or enterprise, or resourcefulness or just common sense but despite its advocation is it always really wanted?
Intelligence & Obedience
WW2 fighter ace Douglas Barder echoed the beliefs of the WW1 Ace Harry Day in that “rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men”. Albeit counter-intuitive to military matters this belief has saved many a situation when sensibility has overruled blind obedience. The same is true of regulations. Mr Dee Hock of credit card fame observed that “Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex intelligent behaviour. Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple stupid behaviour”.
Obedience is about compliance with some authority and if authoritarians become autocrats their rules and regulations control all aspects of people’s behaviour and reactions. These rules, rather than being interpreted with a Pirates Code approach of a “set of loose guidelines” as in the movie, Pirates of the Caribbean, are written in tablets of stone. If rules are followed punctiliously there is either autocratic micromanagerial control by those in authority or a subservient subordination of those being controlled. There may well be freedom of thought, but any freedom of action or speaking-up is stultified.
The resultant absolute and blind obedience may guarantee that nobody steps out of line, but we end up with ‘satisfactory underperformance’. This isn’t wrong, it’s ‘fine’ rather than ‘good’ but ultimately leads to less than adequate overall results. This approach ensures that people ‘behave’ and ‘toe the line’ in an environment of yes-men. The resultant kow-towing thwarts initiative and any organisational aspirations for common sense are frustrated as people try to delegate-up, keep their heads down out of any firing line, and stay silent in the hope of not being fired.
Disobedience and Healthy Disrespect
However, in more open and less toxic environments, where speaking up is allowed and encouraged the views from the factory floor are listened to. These views are constructive and should be made without recourse to disciplinary action. For organisations that allow such latitude and promote initiative this results in optimal decision-making. The consequence of such optimalisation may well avert the risk of any impending lack of performance or potential failure.
Disobedience is not necessarily disrespect; it’s refusing to carry out an instruction rather than not showing respect or courteous behaviour. Indeed, knowing that some level of disobedience will be entertained may promote respect in the knowledge that ‘blind obedience’ is not expected and there is scope for discussion and alternative ways of doing things. Optimal decisions and courses of action require some options and their analysis, there’s always more than one way to skin a cat,
A healthy disrespect for rules and regulations when a situation demands it is essential. If, and when things do go awry it ensures that people will step in to do things properly and without fear of retribution. This requires training and selection of those with that rare and uncommon commodity, common sense.
Conclusions
“In the land of blind the one-eyed man is king” but when the blind are led through a plethora of rules and regulations any departure from these will be considered as disobedience and insolence. In order to see the ‘right way’ then rules sometimes need to be broken, or bent, and intelligent disobedience will be required if good decisions are to be made.
However, in any visionary coup d’état will the king feel threatened? Will the insolence of applying common sense and challenging the status quo be rewarded and recognised or will there be retaliation and retribution?
Intelligent Disobedience is not disrespect – asking questions and ascertaining right from wrong is not foolish and is akin to constructive criticism. Intelligent disobedience is not destructive, but it challenges the status quo in order to obtain a better result. This may rock the boat, but it may well prove if the project boat is buoyantly afloat or is running aground. Remaining silent because the rules don’t say speak up is blind obedience which can verge on dumb insolence. We should, perhaps, remember the words of Abraham Lincoln; “To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men”.
Project managers need to be mindful that rules, regulations, and project procedures are formulated to enable ‘best practice’ based upon experience. Sometimes we need to appreciate the current situation and apply knowledge and, if necessary, speak up and change things. As we all know, change is often resisted and blinkered obedience can create conflict which needs to be resolved both respectfully and above all else, intelligently.
Bio:
Malcolm Peart is an UK Chartered Engineer & Chartered Geologist with over thirty-five years’ international experience in multicultural environments on large multidisciplinary infrastructure projects including rail, metro, hydro, airports, tunnels, roads and bridges. Skills include project management, contract administration & procurement, and design & construction management skills as Client, Consultant, and Contractor.
Leave a Reply