This is one of the common problems for those of us who work more with our heads than with our hands.

Working with our hands, the concurrence between being right and being effective is effectively simultaneous. We know pretty much right away if the wall we are building ain’t plumb. Check twice, cut once, and all that…

Not so with knowledge.

The reality is that neither we, nor the ones we advise, know whether our advice is correct. Our advice might be vindicated/validated only much later, sometimes years or possibly decades after the advice is given.

Some even hide behind this delay as a political screen.

But being effective, as measured by things like decisions influenced, actions effected, etc., are measured now.

Unfortunately, compensation and rewards are linked to being effective, not necessarily to being right (we see tech executives as a prime example of this).

I don’t think the solution is to focus on either being right (which in many cases we can’t honestly know regardless of how convinced we are) - or on being effective (Hitler was effective).

Perhaps a solution is to bring the manual laborer’s mantra of checking twice into the knowledge-worker’s lexicon… instead of purely selling our point of view, convince the board that we have a process of steering a path to the end goal by feedback loops… the same way we drive thru new construction detours to our Walmart (though judging by how some people drive, the feedback loops are few and brief).

This convinces the decision-maker that we are not so focused on being right, but more focused on the goal - no matter what path is taken.

S.D.