I haven't seen this thought so far: Zero tolerance policies must be justified much more strenuously than they are. Strictly speaking, there should be no zero t

I haven't seen this thought so far: Zero tolerance policies must be justified much more strenuously than they are. Strictly speaking, there should be no zero tolerance policies. Things that are subject to zero tolerance should be strictly controlled to where those policies can't be violated. Depending on a memo being broadcast to "fix" it won't work. At work, if there is a zero tolerance policy and someone asks me to do something that even causes me to look at a zero tolerance policy, I bring that up and negotiate the ... something down. "We can't do that because..." I'm not here to debug your policy suite ( unless you ask nicely ) . If it's in writing, I won't violate it - period. If stuff doesn't get done, then that's been already decided to be less costly than violating the policy.