| By Harry Hertz "The Baldrige Cheermudgeon" This blog post was conceived when I was recently reminded of Hanlon's Razor, a rule of thumb that states, One should never attribute to malice something that is adequately explained by stupidity. The razor led me to contemplate work environments focused on punishing the employee (perpetrator) when an error is made, essentially attributing it to intent or malice. In most cases, I would contend that the cause of the error is neither malice nor stupidity. This logic led me to propose Hertz' Razor. But, I will keep you in suspense for a while... I next wondered, why is Hanlon's Razor called a razor? A "philosophical razor" is a rule of thumb used to eliminate ("shave off") an unlikely explanation for an observed phenomenon. There are a number of such razors that have received wide attention, starting with Occam's Razor, which states, Entities should not be multiplied without necessity. More commonly explained, it means that the best and correct explanation is usually the one with the fewest assumptions. Occam is William of Ockham, an English friar, philosopher, and theologian who was believed to have been born in the English town of Ockham in 1285. In doing some research, I discovered several additional razors of interest. One of particular value to this blog is Hitchens' Razor, which states, What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. I interpret this statement to mean that we should manage by fact, a Baldrige core value.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment