There is a new rule at my gym. Well, actually it's not a new rule. It is a new policy of enforcement of a previously existing rule. IF people sign up for a class and then don't show up for it (or cancel their reservation within two hours of the class time) five times in a 30 day period, they will be locked out of making reservations for 14 days.
It is causing, as I am sure you can imagine, some angst among members. As with most organizations, the ones who are feeling angst about it will likely never have to worry about it because they are not the problem.
So, I have spent a couple of weeks talking people down from the ledge. I am mostly clarifying misconceptions - "No, it's not three times ever; it's five times in a month." and "Yes, you are still welcome to come if there is space; you just won't be able to reserve a spot."
About 90% of the people I explain things to end up feeling fine about the rule, even commenting on the graciousness of the policy.
Until Tuesday afternoon. A classmate of mine (who will be in no way impacted by this change) was complaining about it. I thought I could help her see the reasonableness of this by explaining some of the abuses of the system that required a need for the enforcement, canceling up to 25 times in two weeks. She was not having it.
- "Well, that was just one person," she said.
- "Oh, my no. It was not. It was widespread enough across the system that this was needed to be fair for those who play by the rules," I replied.
- "Well, why do we need to sign up at all? Why can't it be first come first served, like it used to be?" she said.
And that's when I realized that she doesn't understand that other people have a different experience than she does.
- Some can't get here 30 minutes before class starts to claim their spot because they are coming from work and fighting traffic.
- Some abuse the system, preventing others from getting the benefit of their membership.
I said to her, "I don't think you are recognizing that different people have different constraints."
Her reply was, "I can't imagine that there are enough people that this needs to happen. Can't they just talk to those people who are a problem?"
Well, tell me you've never led a large group of people before, ma'am. Those two sentences revealed so much that I have seen, mostly in my education career, but also in any large organization.
- What you can imagine is not the same as the reality of what's happening. Those who tend to follow rules believe that most other people do too. This, friends, is not the case. We live in a culture where a large minority believe rules were made to be broken or that specific rules don't apply to them if they can justify their reason for breaking them. People who hold a strong opinion about an issue have trouble understanding why anyone would see it differently. Our lack of imagination about the minds of others prevents us from recognizing an experience other than our own. She couldn't imagine this to be a widespread problem; but I've seen the data, so I know that it is.
- Talking to the problem person rarely solves anything. Students who misbehave in school rarely stop because the teacher or principal has a private chat with them. The recent popularity of "restorative discipline" has resulted in little behavior change. And that's with students who have relationships with school staff and classmates. Imagine how little it will help with adults who don't know each other. People who speed or run red lights regularly will not stop because a cop pulls them over and gives them a good talking to. There may be a very small percentage of people for whom a conversation would effect change, and those are the people who rarely break the rules to begin with.
- Consistent consequences (even small ones) change behavior. I have solid memory of a time when almost no one wore a seatbelt. PSAs about danger did little to help. Changing the law helped some, but a lot of people knew they weren't going to get pulled over most of the time. What did change behavior? Car manufacturers installed a tone that goes off if you don't put your seatbelt on. That's not an onerous punishment, but it an annoying consequence of not buckling up. Most importantly, it is consistent. It happens EVERY time you don't buckle your seatbelt. I don't know anyone (and this could be my lack of imagination, I admit) that keeps driving while listening to that annoying beep. Friday, I buckled a bag of soil into my car because that stupid alarm wouldn't stop! This policy has grace built into it, but when you hit five strikes, technology will take over so that there is a consistent consequence.
Tom Bennet talks about small and consistent consequences in his great book, Running the Room. It's about classrooms, but it isn't hard to see how it could apply in any organization with people, from gyms to churches to civil law. Thank people when they do something right; be predictable about consequences when they do something wrong.
No, you can't just talk to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment