A manager is presenting in an important meeting. He is in the process of making a critical point, yet goes blank as he has forgotten the date he last met with the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO). The CMO is someone who had played an integral role in the breakthrough the manager is reporting on. “Let’s see I think I met with the CMO last Wednesday”. Backpedaling, he painstakingly recants, “no it was Thursday”. After confusion ensues amongst the group, he changes course once again. “Wait, it was probably Tuesday”.
The manager has taken nearly a minute attempting to sort this out. That’s an eternity for someone who has been allocated only 15 minutes on the agenda—with five of those minutes committed to Q&A. The manager seems oblivious to the side-show he has created. Yet he’s especially pleased with himself when he finally figures out that it was indeed Wednesday when he met with the CMO. He’s a man who has a high need for precision–someone who (among other things) prides themselves in getting the facts 100% right every time. To him it’s a badge of honor.
Here’s the problem with people’s need for precision: too often in group settings (think: meetings, teachers instructing, etc) it detracts more than it helps. This gentleman, for example, ultimately got his fact right but in the process lost his audience. Plus, the group ultimately lost its momentum after the manager had trouble regaining his mojo.
The irony is that the meeting date with the CMO was inconsequential to the point the manager was attempting to make. It simply didn’t matter. Yet the manager seemingly had more invested energy in identifying that arcane fact than his all-important proposition. The manager got lost in the weeds. The culprit? His own need for precision.
Precision, as important as it is, is essential only when it has direct bearing on a desired outcome you’re trying to achieve. Otherwise, it’s noise. There are exceptions, but not many.
The opposite also occurs. How frequently do you see this happen?
A manager is attempting to share an inspiring story about Judy —the company’s promising new COO. Early on in the manager’s comments to the assembled group of front-line supervisors the manager says, “Judy was a supervising engineer for only two years before she was promoted to Director.” Dan, a seasoned front-line supervisor, interrupts, “…actually, it was three years.”
Turns out, Dan was right—but his point added no value to the manager’s insightful perspective about Judy.
A human resources director is reporting on the results from the annual employee satisfaction survey to the company’s top officers. She is pointing out the implications from the unmistakable downward trend in employee confidence across the entire enterprise. Arthur, the company’s newest officer, unexpectedly chimes in. “Yes, but look at the high level of confidence amongst the officer corps.”
Turns out, Arthur was right—but the high level of confidence amongst the officers was clearly an anomaly when contrasted against each and every other group in the company. Arthur’s comment unfortunately distracted his fellow officer’s focus away from the all-important need for them to understand the dramatic decline in employee confidence.
Brett, a twenty nine year old chemist, makes a recommendation to his GM about how to remove the unwelcome deposits on the company’s boiler tubes. Betty, a twenty four year veteran of the steam generation department, asks Brett during an important group meeting: “what makes you think, after a short six months with this company, that you are in a position to recommend on such an important issue?”
Turns out Betty was right—Brett was a short-timer, someone who was seemingly ill-equipped to make such a recommendation. But Brett had experience. Turns out, he had helped solve a very similar problem with his last employer.
Each of these latter three examples are variations on people’s need for precision: the first is always representing the facts correctly, the second is never letting an exception go unnoticed, and the third is being unforgiving to those attempting to lead (i.e. expecting perfection).
All three of these are admirable and (usually) well-intended. Yet, it’s not helpful for the group when someone shares an arcane fact that adds no value. It’s not helpful for the group when someone’s clever observation (think: exception) sidetracks the group from weightier matters. And it’s especially not helpful for the group when those that attempt lead it come under constant cross-examination as a means of passing someone’s self-appointed credibility test.
Precision is a good thing—it enabled Man to send astronauts to the Moon and return them safely. Yet, precision isn’t always our friend…no more so than when it becomes maddening to our colleagues!