HRO: (6) Sensitivity to Operations

“Sensitivity to operations” is another essential principle for HROs.  This ties back to “reluctance to simplify [interpretations]” in that, for an organization or leader who is sensitive to operations, even small failures or small unexpected outcomes are indicators that something is not going as intended.  Small failures, or “near misses” are not viewed positively:  “boy, we dodged a bullet with that one!”; “lucky us, that could have gone badly”, “hmmmm, well that was weird, but nothing seems to actually have been damaged.”  This kind of head-in-the-sand approach to management is the opposite of being a high reliability organization.  HROs look at small deviations in a process or in desired outcomes as seismic activity indicating a fault-line in the system:  even tiny seismic vibrations are identified and analyzed by an HRO.  HROs do not wait for the earth to shake before considering the presence of a risk to the system; they identify issues based on small indicators well in advance of a system collapse.  

In order to be sensitive to operations and proactively identify weaknesses, an organization must be comprised of fully-invested people committed to identifying and solving problems early.  Someone on the frontlines who says “hmmmm, well that was weird, but nothing seems to actually have been damaged” is failing to be sensitive to operations; if that same person knows their shift-leader would say the same thing—or even criticize their concern over a non-issue—does not feel free to speak up.  “Freedom to speak up” is a necessary corollary to “sensitivity to operations.”  It ensures that at those the lowest level of the organization, “in the weeds” and “where the rubber meets the road”, are in-tune to how the operation should work, alert for deviations, and empowered to immediately bring those deviations to leadership for action.  For an HRO, this freedom to speak up is more than a freedom—it is an obligation, a sacred trust given to all employees who are fully vested in their roles to preserve safe operations within the organization.  In order for sensitivity to operations and freedom to speak up to exist within an organization, there must be respect and appreciation for all roles in the organization, and there must be regular communication between those various levels and roles.

I believe that scripture has two specific concepts that relate to sensitivity to operations and freedom to speak up.  The first is the importance of counselors and advisors; the second is the idea of “the body of Christ”, wherein each individual is viewed as having unique value within an organization.  For the moment, I’ll leave the “the body of Christ” concept alone, except to say it is foundational to respectful collaboration within any environment and without it a workplace will miss out on the valuable contributions possible by all members. 

Interestingly, we don’t have to look far to find an example in the Bible of how important good advisors are.  We started in 1 Kings with Solomon in chapter 3.  In 1 Kings 11 and 12, we read about Solomon’s death and the ascendancy of his son, Rehoboam, to the throne.  In 1 Kings 12, Rehoboam’s subjects ask him to reduce the burden of taxes and labor placed on them by his father, and they promise him their loyalty in return.  Rehoboam’s advisors, those who previously served his father, suggest that he do as the people ask in order to earn their loyalty.  But Rehoboam chooses to ignore both the people and his father’s advisors.  Instead, he turns his ears to his friends.  Intoxicated by the power of their friend, these junior advisors recommend instead that Rehoboam increase the burden on his people.  This decision leads to insurrection and ultimately results in the loss of Rehoboam’s kingdom.

Rehoboam did the opposite of what an HRO would do:  he ignored the distress signals from the lowest levels of the organization; he ignored the wisdom of experienced advisors within the organization; and he opted to follow guidance from people with selfish motives and virtually no knowledge of operations.  No sensitivity to operations here; no freedom to speak up.  Instead, voices expressing concern were harshly silenced and Rehoboam made a selfishly oblivious decision which resulted in destruction.  If Rehoboam had been committed to the long-term success of his organization—the kingdom God had given him—and the good of the people under his authority, he would have made different decisions.  He would have heard the concerns of his subjects as small seismic indicators of a fault line in the kingdom; he would have carefully and thoughtfully addressed those concerns, preserved peace and established his integrity as king.  Instead, he aligned his priorities with those interested only in short-term gains, those who had no interest in protecting the weak; he crushed the voices of dissent and steam-rolled forward with a self-centered agenda.  

An organization desiring to become highly reliable can learn from Rehoboam:  listen to the concerns of people at all levels in the organization; seek a robust and nuanced understanding of the problem being described; use all available advisors, solicit input from diverse sources; identify the motives of those providing advice and be sure those motives align with the true goals of the organization; reject selfish and short-sighted guidance; focus on what is best for the organization in the long-term. 

1)      Have you observed—in yourself or in others—a Rehoboam-style approach to hearing concerns from subordinates?  That is, a manager who ignores criticism or bad news and instead seeks out an “echo-chamber” for guidance?  What was the outcome?

2)      Even if Rehoboam’s followers had not revolted, Rehoboam’s uncompassionate response to their concerns would not have resulted in loyalty (see 1 Kings 12: 4 and 7).  How does a leader’s listening style effect the commitment and engagement of followers within an organization?  How does an organization benefit from employees who are fully engaged, fully committed, to the success of the organization—how does it enhance “sensitivity to operations”?  Consider in particular the goal of zero-harm which HROs all share.

3)      The book of Proverbs also emphasizes how counselors and advisors are essential to success.  See Proverbs 11: 14; 15: 22; and 24: 6.  Who are your counselors and advisors?  What characteristics do they have:  are they empowered to give you guidance you may not want to hear, or have you surrounded yourself with “yes-men”?  Are they committed to the long-term health of the organization?  Are they Godly people, motivated by a desire to serve others, to protect the innocent and hold the guilty accountable? 

4)      Who are the people in your organization who can tell you how the operation is functioning at the lowest level?  Can they easily reach you—do you have an open door policy—or would they struggle to bring concerns to those who can affect change?