Earlier in her career, when General Motors CEO Mary Barra became VP of Global Human Resources, she replaced GM’s 10-page dress code policy with two words — “Dress Appropriately.”
Her own HR Department immediately pushed back, insisting the employee manual needed more specifics. Matters like the prohibition of t-shirts with inappropriate sayings were of concern to them.
Barra held firm.
She explained her perspective in equally straightforward terms.
In her view, people live down to overly prescriptive policies. In other words, people push the boundaries and fight against the rules by doing exactly what’s required. Nothing less and nothing more. They become determined to do the least possible so they can stay within the rules.
By contrast, broad principles or guidelines invite judgment, ownership, and high standards. People live up to them.
Instead of following a script, people must interpret the intent of the rule and apply it thoughtfully. That often leads to behavior that exceeds the bare minimum because people feel trusted, respected, and responsible.
Barra wanted team members at GM to live up to and not down to as many policies as possible.
As it turned out, she was right.
The norms and standards surrounding the dress code were elevated once the policy became more general.
Those who crossed the line of sound judgment were asked to reconsider. They soon began making judgments that operated within the team norms going forward.
To be sure, for fairness and legal reasons, many policies must be precise and consistent, such as safety procedures, regulatory compliance, security and access control, financial approvals, emergency response, and absences and leaves, to name a few.
But too many organizations go overboard and write hyper-detailed rules for areas that actually need judgment, such as customer or client relationships, team interaction, interviewing, and performance management.
Even some areas that appear to need hard and fast rules and details, such as remote work and time management, will often produce better outcomes with a more general rule or policy.
Let’s take customer service as an example. Here is a common policy: customer service reps must answer all calls within 3 rings, use an exact greeting script, and only offer advice or help to three types of requests.
Reps comply most of the time but use very little judgment outside the established lines. They start to check boxes, avoid helping, and become highly robotic in their interactions.
By creating a more general rule, such as “Provide timely, helpful responses that leave customers satisfied,” an organization asks the service reps to think, make sound judgments, and decide on their own how to meet customer expectations.
In response, they naturally give more thoughtful, human responses, usually resulting in more satisfied customers.
The specifics of rules and policies shape behavior. Policies stated too broadly will likely produce inconsistency and ambiguity, while rules stated too specifically will reduce the initiative and creativity people need to express themselves authentically.
Examine the many rules and policies in your organization and team. Are any so specific as to create hidden resistance and thoughtlessness? Consider asking team members to think through how to apply a policy and evolve their judgment in the process.
Avoid the trap of believing highly detailed policies are always the right answer. Tight rules gain compliance, but smart principles gather commitment.
