Should we always obey orders?

Why disobedience should be possible within a company

Being able to disregard an instruction is of fundamental importance in the work of an engineer at DAES. To do so may be responsible conduct, which makes sense of the work in hand. Giving responsibility to our engineers enables them to progress and contribute to the success of our projects, and therefore to the projects of our customers. It also creates a virtuous circle in which the company and its customers are the beneficiaries.

An engineer who, on the other hand, simply does what he's told, without exercising his free will in any way, operates in a completely different way. His only aim is to get the task over and done with. This means that he fails to achieve what should be his main objective, which is to ensure that the project is a success. Experience has taught us that this could lead to serious, and at times catastrophic, failures!

As a managing partner at DAES, I advocate assertiveness or, in other words, the opportunity of each of us to express our own views while:

●    assessing the various aspects of a complex situation

●    setting out and selecting the priorities

●    being able to take decisions

I'm convinced that, by recognising the responsibility of individuals, and therefore their legitimate right to choose whether to obey or disobey, the company and its customers may reap the benefits, due to increased:

●    interest - and therefore involvement - in the projects on the part of the engineers

●    ability to identify and implement the possible improvements

●    capacity for innovation, especially through the exchanges of views that such responsibility requires

Under what conditions should it be possible to "disobey"?

Being able to disobey:

●    Is a proof of autonomy.

●    Is the exercise of free will.

●    Is an ability to take decisions.

To be able to do this, we have to have an overall rather than a partial vision of the project. The fragmentation of projects in my view is the opposite of what we should be doing. It's essential for each engineer to have control over all the ins and outs of the project. Taking full responsibility means taking the initiative of 'disobeying' if necessary, by disregarding an instruction initially received.

What kind of organisation to we have to put in place to achieve this objective?

Certainly, an individual has to have full responsibility for a project, from A to Z, but not in isolation. By involving a number of people, we can exploit the collective intelligence of a team, which is greater than the sum of the individual parts.

As engineers, when we work on a project we begin by drawing up a plan of action based on a preliminary analysis, in which we implement our skills. It's at this stage that we lay down the orders and instructions. The entitlement of the person or entity imparting these orders is essential, but the possibility of disregarding them is just as important.

In the subsequent executive phase of the project, we have to be able to adapt to situations which deviate from our expectations. At times, this may mean that we have to disobey the instructions.

Clearly, the closer we are to those who give the orders, the more we may 'risk' disobeying them. When management is benevolent and relations are based on trust, each individual may dare to take decisions, which stops being a risk and becomes an opportunity! Thanks to the responsibilities and powers of initiative of each individual, I believe we can create teams which are fully autonomous.

Finally, being able to disobey within a company doesn't mean that anarchy rules. This is the result of a management approach within which the hierarchy which issues the orders takes care to:

●    ensure that all those involved have broad margins of responsibility

●    recognise their legitimate entitlement within the project overall

●    exchange views in a positive manner at all times

One of the instructions that we engineers should therefore have the right to receive is "I order you to (consider) disobeying"!

An unfortunate example…

I'd like to take advantage of this date of 26 April to remind you of the Chernobyl power station catastrophe of 1986. Exactly 36 years ago, this incident offers an example of what I mean by "failure to disobey".

Among other factors (an intrinsic design fault in the core of the reactor, which went into 'runaway' mode), this accident can be attributed to the obedience of unsuitable orders received from a political authority:

●    to force the power output of the reactor beyond its normal limit

●    and to disconnect a safety device to enable this to be done

The local managers should have disobeyed these orders, but the managerial system in place (fear of disciplinary action, removal of responsibility from individuals) made it impossible to do this.