Checklists


At the workplace (or at least in the software industry), we see endless checklists. Most of these checklists are useless, or even worse than useless: they just delay things without adding any value. Why then do we still have these checklists? Good old bureaucracy, I thought. Which reminded me of this tirade by Bill Bonner against bureaucracy:
“But you don't really think bureaucrats could improve the quality of teaching, do you? Of course not. What do they know about teaching? Or agriculture? Or selling stocks? Or banking? Or anything else? What improvements have bureaucrats ever made? Name one! Who invented indoor plumbing? Who invented the repeating rifle or rolled the first cigarette? Who created Facebook?

Bureaucrats do not create wealth. They transfer it. From the people who earned it to themselves and other zombies.”

But if checklists are just bureaucracy, why then do survive in the corporate world? Surely the profit motive should eliminate these inefficiencies, right? Guess again: once these checklists are part of the “process”, then you can be sure that the people whose jobs depend on its existence will fight any move to eliminate it.

Turns out I was only partially right. In some industries, checklists are created in companies for compliance reasons (usually due to regulatory aspects; at others due to certification reasons which are minimum criteria to get future contracts). So are checklists just a necessary evil then?

Apart from the ones people create in their own lives voluntarily, is there any such thing like a good checklist? (Voluntary checklists include the ones people create to list the stuff they need to pack for a trip).

I got my answer when I read this book review of “The Checklist Manifesto” by Atul Gawande that listed several attributes of a good checklist: it should be short (too long and people will just skim through it), it shouldn’t cover mistakes nobody makes (like forgetting to take your suitcase on your trip) or mistakes that don’t matter (you can buy a toothbrush anywhere). He also states that checklists only make sense in activities that involve a large element of routine (e.g. flying a plane) and where the consequences of mistakes are high (e.g. surgery).

But the surprising benefit of checklists that Gawande discovered was that it allows members of a team to point out mistakes (they don’t risk being reprimanded for raising irrelevant issues: if it’s on the checklist, they can assume that it must be relevant).

Apparently checklists have their uses even at the workplace…who’d have thought?!

Comments

  1. About check lists, the debate may continue. I will continue to use my check-list for my personal items packing for my trips. I know I can buy toothbrush "anywhere", but I would prefer not to go in search of a shop to buy the silly toothbrush while on trip!

    But I liked the quote on bureaucrats. Though I don't write in the public domain to provide stuff to be quoted (anyway I am not sure if I have abundance of wit/wisdom in expression), I did come to the same conclusion about bureaucrats' ability (to be accurate, their inability) to be creative. My conclusions are these:

    No bureaucrat can ever be creative. If, someone starts his/her career with inherent ability to be creative by mistake, over a little period in bureaucracy, the creative ability will become extinct. Systems in general, and government systems in particular, are very oppressive to creativity. In art and science, technology and engineering, talented people can overcome the hurdles of the system to shine with their creativity. No bureaucrat has ever done that trick; no bureaucrat ever will!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Animal Senses #7: Touch and Remote Touch

The Retort of the "Luxury Person"