Game in the Brain

An NC is not inherently a bad thing. It’s all about CONTEXT. is 20 bad or good, is 1M bad or good? its all context. A non-conformity depends. Example, where it would not be bad, is when a Company set out Management Objectives and really did attempt stuff they couldn’t do before (and not something the management knew they could already do)  and they Got NC since in the number of SMART objectives they set they failed in some.

Scoring 100% just means I hedged my uncertainty. It looks good to the uninitiated. But it just means the company has no risk appetite and is just trying to slow its eventual demise (IMO). Improvement inherently has FAILURE, if you can already do it then it’s not an improvement – being able to do something new: repair a computer, set up a network, fix a car problem, pass a test, etc… if its something you could not do before, then there are things you didn’t know.

NC = Bad and Failure = BAD is such a terrible mental model (its like those Absolute NUmbers you see without Context data knee jerk reactions ) – now that’s BAD.

Like most powerful skills in life – it has so much nuance and the subtle variation of factors yields different results. Sensitivity to NUANCE it’s breaking down a simpler 2-3 factors to more and more factors and trying to organize them again and again.

A skill level high enough there are subtle factors that we used to ignore or where unable to process when we started out.

I feel like I have to explain sometimes Uncertainty is not BAD. Its a factor in work and life. That to improve we need to deal with A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY. We can be risk-averse or we can be risk taking, the balance we strike is not just in how we monitor and control factors – in these uncertain times – Monitor and Control is a GIVEN – now you have to Juggle a NARRATIVE – the things we tell ourselves about what we are doing.