4 ms·
Also did some work ages ago with a safety critical element. Checklist fatigue is real. Especially in govt compliance areas - a lot of folks have attitude of pa
by privateSFacct 7y ago
Also did some work ages ago with a safety critical element. Checklist fatigue is real.
Especially in govt compliance areas - a lot of folks have attitude of parent, get over the fatigue because this is "important". I once went to a presentation where they showed someone in handcuffs because they didn't follow the procedure. There are 100s of irrelevant items (yes - 8 track data standards compliance in some docs still) on some of these lists and people know it is total BS.
The authors of the article make a great point, local adaption and implementation. The checklists that work are carefully curated and honed. I currently work in a space with lots of checklists, and I take that approach, do we still need this item? Things change. If you make the checklist useful MUCH higher compliance. That means updating and refining it so it's the reference guide for what should be happening not an endless list of all possible things one could do.
- scarejunba 7y agoI had a 138-page checklist during a software engineering gig. It was too ensure that my software was secure. While it was being approved (it passed, of course, the checklist being out of date and easy to meet), the legacy software (only fragments of which had source left) fulfilled the function. The legacy software was known to crash on constructed input that wasn't hard to guess. The checklist had come after the software so any software that was better than legacy software couldn't displace it if it wasn't better in every way. So if you fixed one bug and attempted to deploy you couldn't because your new version had to pass the checklist. Fascinating stuff.