Many decisions in life require a delicate balance of trade-offs in order to get the best results. Recent examples highlight the need to restore such balance to everyday policies especially for so-called "Zero-Tolerance" policies.
Commentary
Schneier wrote a nice article on zero-tolerance policies which he refers to as "zero-discretion" policies. He brings up the recent story of the cub scout who brought a camping utensil to school as an example of an unbalanced policy gone awry.
Zero-discretion policies stem from the need to avoid inappropriate discrimination, that is to be "fair". To that end, no discrimination-- no matter how warranted-- must be allowed. You know you're dealing with a zero-discretion policy when the enforcer of the policy agrees with you, but "those are the rules, I can't do anything about it."
Schneier recommends a four-pronged solution:
- Rules - Start with the rules & procedures.
- Discretion - Throw in a dash of discretion to taste.
- Appleals - Add plenty of opportunities for people to appeal.
- Audit - Stir occasionally to ensure smooth consistency.
Meta
What are some examples of situations where you've encountered "zero-tolerance" policies?
1 comment:
I was in an airport with someone who arrived to check in 28 minutes before her flight departed. They refused to check her in, despite the fact that there were no lines in security and still space available, because they were not allowed to check anyone in within 30 minutes of departure. The manager claimed that the "system" wouldn't allow it, but when I informed her that any system can be overridden with the proper authority and insisted on speaking to her supervisor, she ignored me and walked away.
End result: the other passenger had to wait three hours for the next flight and get home at midnight instead of 9 pm.
Post a Comment
In addition to comments, please indicate any typographical errors or issues related to this post.
Or you can contact me in private.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.