Consistency and Precedents

What would you prefer to be called: Consistent or Inconsistent?

What I have usually observed and experienced is that there is a value judgement associated with the words Consistency and Inconsistency.

We would prefer to be called consistent rather than inconsistent.

But what about situations which require responses that are deviations from the past? Should we still hang on to precedents? The answer obviously is a no!

But do we hang on to precedents in such situations? The answer, in many cases, is a yes!.

Why would we do that?

Possibly at times it may be difficult to figure out that the situation is atypical. Hence we provide a typical response.

But let us say that we go ahead and do take the plunge – we do take the atypical decision. And later we were to realize that the way the situation played out was not so atypical. How would others view us then? More importantly how would we view ourselves? Would we view ourselves as inconsistent? How would that make us feel?

In atypical situations we have a choice between being consistent and most probably ineffective, and being inconsistent and most probably effective.

If we choose the first option, then irrespective of the outcome we would atleast be seen as consistent. If we choose the second option, there is a possibility that we are seen both as inconsistent and ineffective.

So what do we choose?

This dilemma maybe at the root of why many of us might be so hung up about sticking to old precedents and not setting new precedents.

Acknowledging this dilemma is the first step in creating “situation appropriate” responses.

-

Sourav