A few months ago some friends were telling me about a new policy in their apartment complex that was infringing on their quality of life. Their rooftop used to welcome dogs and they enjoyed taking theirs out there after work and on the weekends. Of course, there had been community standards that set expectations that owners must clean up after their pets. However, after 1 resident violated this trust, the board made a blanket rule that no dogs are allowed on the rooftop. So the dozens of dog owners that enjoyed and respected the rooftop with their animals, are now out of luck because of one person who acted disrespectfully. 

This lesson can be applied at work too. Have you ever had to start doing a time-intensive (which means expensive—time = a costly resource) administrative process because one or a few people violated the trust of leadership? Say, having to clock in and out? Have you ever made a decision about a policy right after someone on your team violated your trust? Like forcing all outward facing emails to go through your desk?  

The overwhelming majority of your team can be trusted to work their full schedules, and can manage external facing communications very professionally. But you’ve been burned before and so a normal reaction—I think—is to run to the extreme, to prevent yourself from getting burned again. But at what cost? 

1. Are your policies effective at curbing the problematic behavior you’re trying hard to avoid?

2. What is the cost to the rest of your team’s productivity and morale for complying with these reactive policies?

3. Have your policies had other unintended consequences that are negatively impacting progress?

It’s understandable that we react—that we tighten the rope when we feel that someone is taking advantage of us. And maybe some of those reactive policies are essential to protect ourselves, the team and the company. But when things calm down, and our ego recovers, we should take a moment to reconsider the impact our reactive policies have on our team and the problem they were meant to curb. If not, we may consider an alternate response that addresses the specific violators. Perhaps our policies have curbed one problem but they’ve created another. My friend’s rooftop no longer runs the risk of having dog waste, however, dog owning residents (and there are many) are now considering moving not just to a more pet-friendly building, but to one that doesn’t make hasty decisions that negatively impact the overwhelming majority of trustworthy residents.