Embracing error as normal

The principle that “error is normal” is foundational to any organization intending to integrate Human and Organizational Performance (HOP) into their operation^[1]. It challenges a deeply ingrained aspect of human nature: the tendency to assign blame when things go wrong. Our instinctive reaction is often to think, “It can’t be me, so it must be you,” leading to a cycle of blame that can hinder organizational learning and growth. Understanding this can shift the organizational mindset from blame to curiosity, fostering a more resilient and effective workplace.

The Blame Game: A Natural Instinct

Blaming others is part of our psychological and cultural makeup. When faced with a problem or failure, our immediate reaction is to deflect responsibility. This instinct is part of human nature and a defense mechanism that shields our self-esteem. However, in organizational settings, this reflex can be counterproductive.

In industrial and corporate environments, the focus on blame often exacerbates problems rather than solving them. According to a study by the American Psychological Association, 49% of employees report that their workplace has a “blame culture,” where finger-pointing is commonplace and detrimental to morale and productivity. This blame culture can lead to a toxic environment where employees are afraid to report mistakes, fearing reprimand rather than seeking solutions. The result is not only decreased employee engagement but also a higher incidence of errors. It’s important to remember that error is a consequence, not a cause, and all errors present an opportunity to learn and improve, rather than being a reason for punishment.

The Futility and Damage of Blame

Blame has a corrosive effect on organizational health. When individuals or teams are penalized or publicly shamed for errors, it creates an environment of fear rather than learning. This fear can stifle innovation and discourage open communication. A survey by Gallup found that organizations with a high blame culture see a 30% lower employee engagement rate, which correlates with decreased productivity and increased turnover.

Moreover, blame does not address the systemic drivers of errors, as it focuses on individual faults rather than the systemic issues that drove someone to do something that made sense to them at the time. This misalignment can lead to recurring problems, with the underlying causes remaining unaddressed. For instance, a report by the National Safety Council highlighted that 90% of incidents in industrial settings are due to errors rather than deliberate violations. This statistic underscores the fact that most issues arise from systemic problems, worker adaptation to conditions, or unforeseen circumstances rather than malicious intent or gross negligence. To prevent these issues, it is crucial to define error and separate it from events, recognizing that the probability of error is only predictable and preventable if you see your vulnerability^[2].

Shifting from Blame to Curiosity

To truly improve organizational performance, it is essential to shift from a mindset of blame to one of curiosity. This shift involves recognizing that errors are a normal part of human activity and that even the most experienced and skilled individuals will make mistakes. By adopting a mindset of curiosity, organizations can move away from a punitive approach and instead focus on understanding and mitigating the factors that contribute to errors.

Curiosity allows organizations to explore systemic drivers and develop more effective solutions. Instead of asking, “Who is to blame?” leaders should ask, “What can we learn from this?” This approach encourages a thorough investigation into the underlying causes and promotes a culture of continuous improvement. For example, a study by the Harvard Business Review found that organizations that foster a culture of curiosity and learning see a 25% improvement in performance metrics compared to those that focus on blame.

Beyond the Simplistic: Embracing Systemic Understanding

Understanding that errors are often systemic rather than individual is crucial for effective problem-solving. When organizations focus on assigning blame, they miss the opportunity to address broader issues that may have contributed to the problem. A systemic approach involves examining processes, communication channels, organizational structures, and culture to identify and address potential weaknesses and areas for improvement.

This shift in perspective can lead to more sustainable improvements. For instance, the aviation industry has long embraced a “just culture” approach, which focuses on learning from errors rather than punishing individuals. This approach has contributed to a significant reduction in aviation accidents and incidents, demonstrating the effectiveness of moving beyond blame to understand and address systemic issues.

Conclusion

The principle that “error is normal” is a critical component of effective Human and Organizational Performance implementation and integration. By moving away from blame and embracing a mindset of curiosity, organizations can foster a more resilient and innovative culture. Understanding that errors are often systemic and addressing the systemic drivers rather than assigning individual blame can lead to more meaningful and sustainable improvements. As we navigate the complexities of organizational performance, let us remember that acknowledging and learning from errors is not a sign of weakness but a pathway to growth and excellence.