I am not averse to quality control (QC), especially when it comes to manufacturing products involving people and machines.
After all, I certainly don't want metal shards in my breakfast cereal.
Yet, when it comes to services provided by human beings to other human beings, I believe we need to rethink how we approach quality control.
Unlike manufacturing, the quality of human interactions and services is not always easy to measure, quantify or standardize.
And when organizations insist on imposing more and more controls to ensure quality, they can inadvertently create an environment that leans towards micromanagement, placing undue stress and pressure on employees.
From my observations, ironically, the very controls intended to improve quality can actually result in less quality.
People under stress and pressure do not necessarily perform better.
In fact, they can become less engaged, less creative, more hesitant and more prone to making mistakes.
So, what if we approached quality differently?
What if we created an environment where mistakes were not only expected but genuinely embraced as opportunities to learn and improve?
Imagine an organization where employees who make a mistake are encouraged to fix it themselves, when appropriate, and document what happened and what they learned in a shared
Lessons Learned Repository, without having to name names.
Or, when they cannot resolve the issue themselves, they feel comfortable bringing it to their colleagues so they can collectively find a solution and document what they learned in the repository.
And imagine this repository being accessible to everyone, at every level of the organization, so that everyone can benefit from these experiences.
From my own leadership experience, I have had employees come to me voluntarily when they made mistakes.
When I asked them how come to came to me, they said, they knew I would not get angry or upset.
My first response was not to find someone to blame but to work with them to fix the mistake.
Then we would reflect on what happened, document what we learned and ask a simple question, "what can we do to reduce the likelihood of this happening again?"
Sometimes the answer might involve adding a layer of segregation of duties, revising a process, clarifying responsibilities or introducing a simple check.
Other times, we might recognize that despite our best efforts, some mistakes will happen again from time-to-time.
After all, we are human beings, not machines.
To me, this is what a genuine culture of continuous improvement looks like. One where people feel comfortable enough to acknowledge mistakes, take responsibility, collaborate and learn, rather than hide problems out of fear of the consequences.
Of course, accountability and appropriate controls still have their place, especially where safety, ethics or significant risks are involved.
But accountability does not have to mean punishment, and quality does not always require more control.
Perhaps the greatest quality control mechanism we can create is not another policy or layer of approval.
Perhaps it is an environment where people genuinely want to do quality work, feel trusted to do so and are not afraid to admit when something goes wrong.
Because sometimes, the best way to improve quality is to loosen our grip on control.