by Sergey Kotlov
Another name for this article could be “How to delight your clients by making them suffer first”. It’s a story about a decision that wasted a lot of time for many and didn’t bring any value because it was based on distrust.
If you ever met me in person, you would know that trust and transparency is my default way of communicating. As I always prefer long-term relationships over short-term, I see no reason to do otherwise. First, it saves me energy — I don’t need to filter out some precious chunks of information and keep track of everything. I don’t need to be afraid that one moment I forget about the facts I haven’t shared on purpose and find myself in a stupid position. It’s the same with lies. You have to remember what you said and to whom. The process drains a huge amount of energy. Second, I find it disrespectful in some way. If I don’t have a reason not to trust you but you trust me, it means I think lower of you. Third, trust by default makes things move much faster as you don’t waste time.
Though I do live this way right now, the ghosts of my past appear occasionally and bring some damage…
More than a year ago the Management 3.0 team decided to publish the ratings of its facilitators. Public ratings is a powerful instrument for making a system to control itself. When facilitators are not good in educating other people, their ratings get lower and they get fewer gigs. The similar scheme is used by Amazon to rate books and Yelp! to compare places. The system is self-balancing without additional control imposed from above. However, as any instrument, it could be gamed. For example, facilitators could start creating fake evaluations to increase their own rating. Having that in mind, I made an assumption some facilitators will start deceiving in the future.
I keep aside the fact all assumptions should be proved first. Now my focus is on why that assumption appeared at all. The answer is simple and embarrassing — I distrusted our customers.