I answer this question from my professional vision.I am LEAN leadership consultant and (thankfully) not trained according to the mostly prevailing western LEAN standards. What do I mean by that?
LEAN is the western translation of the Toyota Production System (TPS).During the visits to Toyota, the western consultants saw exactly what methods and resources Toyota used to become successful. LEAN is based on these “tools”, but not on the deeper philosophy and corporate culture.
What the western consultants could not perceive well was the culture at Toyota.This culture was put down by Taiichi Ohno in the years 50. A few notable (freely translated) statements by Taiichi Ohno:
- “No one will lose his work, even if your current job may be lost over a time.
As long as you help us get better and you bet, there is always place within Toyota “
This is to a large extent the same as the 14 points of Dr. W. Edwards Deming, who gave workshops and lectures in Japan in the years 50 and 60.The probability is that Taiichi Ohno has attended one of these lectures.
Back to the question:
“ When you make a mistake, is it better to hide it or not? “
In the years 90, IBM conducted research into the cost of late-noticed errors (with software), which went back to Boehm’s research (1981, Cost of Errors).This showed that the later an error was noticed, the more expensive and harder the recovery. Hiding a made mistake is very expensive for a company.
However, in many companies the employees are charged for how much work they do and how few mistakes they make.If you make a lot of mistakes, you’ll fly out. Then you can better hide that mistake.
Dr.W. Edwards Deming had already shown in the 60th years that about 94% of all errors do not come from stupid or unwilling employees, but because the workflow, processes and systems do not function properly. His institution was therefore. If a mistake is made then you feel free to ask the employee (who is already worried enough that this has happened) and you go together to investigate why that mistake could arise (you look at the processes, not the employee).
A nice example from the Toyota world:
A new employee was taught how to mix car paint.After a while the lacquer didn’t want to dry and the foreman was looking. First he rested the new employee (respect, fear free).Then they went on to investigate why this had happened. It soon became clear that two almost identical cans were on the shelf and the wrong look was used. The foreman apologized to the new employee.For the foreman it was clear, but for a new employee not.
In an “ordinary” company, the employee would now be trained.Not at Toyota! Together they changed the process and made a clear separation of the cans. In this way it was also clear for other new employees. In other words training is symptom control and must be repeated continuously, Toyota improved the process (where the cause was) you only have to do it once.
This only works when everyone (from the lowest employee to the CEO/director) works according to this philosophy (Respect, eliminating fear).This automatically also means that numerical targets no longer work (脙 漏 脙 漏 N of Dr. W. Edwards Deming s other items). Only then will the employees dare to admit their mistakes and you can do something about them in a timely manner. And if you’re quick, restoring a made mistake will cost you the least time and money, investigate the real cause (in the process) and never get this problem again. You immediately show the employees that the processes are there to help to and that they can and should improve those processes themselves.
This is called continuous improvement.It is not really difficult, but the current way in which companies are conducting makes continuous improvement almost impossible, even though you use all those beautiful LEAN tools, because the people through the control and culture have fear and are made passive.
A flawless life, that’s not in it. At least, not if you are human.
For ordinary people: acknowledge the mistake, limit the damage, learn from it.
If you are a lawyer: Do not deprive the mistake.
In an organization with the right culture, it is encouraged to make mistakes negotiable and to learn from them.
This can only be in a safe environment, in which the assertion is that the process is the assurance that must prevent errors.This will move the focus from 鈧?艙competence 鈧?to process, and with it the way people work. Here is apparently what to improve, beautiful!
However, there are quite a few organisations where such culture is not present. The relevant question here is: Do I want to work for an employer where I can’t make mistakes?
The same question can also apply to personal relationships.
Depends on it.Maybe hiding is better, if the data subject (n) doesn’t know that you made a mistake and telling it makes things harder. Hiding is also better if telling the other only hurts.
The main thing is to assume that it is the one of the other (and).If telling the error helps them, short or long term then we say it, despite the consequences for ourselves.
Tell the truth in love.
鈧?艗though the Lie is still so fast, the truth is chasing her wel 鈧?
You know that saying?From sayings and proverbs You can say what you want, but they exist because they have survived. And they have survived because people attach value to it. People attach value to it because they find support in it. And that does not come from the sky.
But the answer to your question is very personal and situation dependent.
For Example: Are you a driver in an organization and you make an error that gives your organization an advantage in the short term and in the long term (possibly) a problem, but you already know-as many drivers nowadays-that you when that Error if you have an upper water-you have long worked with another organisation, there is no immediate need for you to reveal that mistake.You only take advantage of it. You will have to live with it that you have made that mistake, that you benefit from it and that you can (possibly) disadvantage people in the future. Your conscience must come to mind. No one can answer that question better for you than you.
For Example: You are an architect and you design a building for a project and you will find that you have made a mistake in calculating the capacity of the construction that carries the balconies of this 50-storey tower flat.The correct calculated alternative is 15% more expensive and with that the cost of the building is also 2% higher, which will lower the profit margin for the project developer by 2%. And then you soon have a few million.
The resistance to flower this error is of course very large, but it is about human lives.If you don’t cough up this, then you might be responsible for the deaths of dozens of people. I don’t think you want to have that on your conscience and in So鈩?N case I would always advise you to confess the mistake Before that accidents happen.
For Example: You are welder and responsible for welding the support construction of gainers.You will find yourself that you have not ordered a number of products in the right way and therefore do not meet the quality requirements. You can wait for them to be disapproved by quality control, or you can indicate it yourself to your boss. This choice seems simple to me. To admit your mistake speaks clearly to your advantage.
For Example: You have been cheating.Your partner will not appreciate it. But it will be much less appreciated if he/she should hear it from someone else of yours. Because then you have to explain why you have gone weird and explain why you kept that secret. One 漏 to explain stupimality you will still succeed if you understand each other. But two… that’s all really a lot lastiger….
When is an error an error?
Is an error without affecting an error.
If there is an error in the risk, you can only report your mistake as soon as possible.
Is there any error in the process happening?
Can you see the difference in result?
Is The result deviating?Positive or negative?
If environment is not ripe for it and/or you cannot bear the consequences, you are silent.
I always confess them because I find it a learning moment.
But that has its consequences.