I just joined the PsychSafety group on Slack, and one of the channels that was up for discussion is the CODE OF CONDUCT that the group will have. I am keen to explore this subject further, so please bear with me.
Firstly, I think an essential part of a code of conduct is what happens when there is a violation of the code and company ethics. A “misconduct,” if you will. I refer you to the article, defining a code of conduct. Maybe the code of conduct should be called a “code of misconduct,” ha!
I am beginning to see that this code will be our Conductor (how we conduct ourselves) as in a “conductor of music” or Conductor of electricity, type Conductor: The coded procedure that runs the show. So, instead of the managers managing and telling us how to conduct ourselves (behave), we have a single AI coded procedure for when we have misconducts.
So, we don’t necessarily need a manager to manage our behavior and disputes per se, we need a conductor. And wasn’t it Steve Jobs that claimed that he was such a conductor. Apparently, this was his quote: “Musicians play their instruments. I play the orchestra”. Now, I am recommending that we should have an actual coded procedure as our Conductor; a self-governing, AI conductor of information.
When we have a misconduct within a team, between two nodes or people, it breaks the conduction of information between two people, and we get a glitch in the matrix (team). So, it is imperative to restore or resolve these misconducts.
Here is my suggested AI Information Conductor to be used whenever we feel a misconduct has occurred. To be used to resolve any misconduct between two or more team members.
Leave a Reply