The Justice Quotient
In this episode (inspired by page 49 of my book, The Spirit of Work), I share the three essential components that must be in place to find a just solution. The solution must consider everyone’s needs.
Here are the three Justice Quotients:
- Diversity of perspectives must be included: If only one person has a voice, diverse viewpoints are missing. In situations where people are similar, actively seek other perspectives to gain different points of view. This ensures more just decisions, as relying on limited input can lead to incorrect conclusions.
- Consult those most affected: Those most affected by a decision must be consulted. If the individual is vulnerable and cannot make decisions on their own, their guardian or caretaker should be involved in the consultation. The person closest to the job is often the expert, so either the affected individual or their closest support should provide input.
- All stakeholders should be present when discussing the decision: In cases of a power imbalance, consider the rights and responsibilities of those most affected, and take into account the power dynamics. Ask those affected if the proposed resolutions would satisfy their concerns.
Real-Life Examples:
Example 1:
A manager aimed to build his team’s capacity by training a lead hand to deliver safety presentations. However, the lead hand became flustered during training as the manager assumed what help was needed without consulting him. Realizing his mistake, the manager decided to trust the lead hand to deliver the next presentation independently. This trust empowered the lead hand, who excelled and received a standing ovation from the crew. The situation highlighted a shift in power dynamics, with the manager learning to prioritize the lead hand’s needs over his own methods.
Example 2:
A toxic manager in a different department repeatedly undermined the only female engineer responsible for safety, using misogynistic names and demeaning her input. Despite her warnings about compromised safety, no one spoke up due to fear of the bully. HR intervened after she filed a complaint, gathering evidence and perspectives. However, instead of disciplining the manager, HR held a meeting where he verbally attacked her. The power imbalance and lack of action led the female engineer and three top employees to quit, leaving the company weakened. In contrast, McDonald’s handles similar situations by immediately supporting employees and addressing aggressive customers, which resets power dynamics and protects workers. Justice requires protection for all parties involved; without it, employees are left vulnerable, and toxic behaviors worsen.
Example 3:
Two nurses were caring for an elderly patient when a non-medical relative insisted that a catheter be removed, aggressively demanding a nurse to do so. The nurse refused, citing the need for authorization, but eventually gave in due to intimidation. The commotion drew a second nurse, who was black, and the relative turned on her, using racist slurs and threatening a complaint. The black nurse explained the risks of removing the catheter without proper evaluation, but the relative continued his aggression before leaving. He filed a complaint, which deeply affected the black nurse. Her charge nurse and union assured her of support, and an investigation revealed that no harm had occurred, and both nurses were mistreated. The complaint was dismissed, and the relative was banned from the hospital. Justice was served, and the nurses felt protected.
If you carefully examine the examples above, you can clearly identify the injustices, how the justice quotient was used, and the consequences of not applying the justice quotients.
Don’t have the book, “The Spirit of Work: Timeless Wisdom, Current Realities”? Get yours here!
