From Cockpit to Conference Room: Why Misbehavior, Not Just Human Error, Crashes Systems

In 1977, the world witnessed the deadliest aviation disaster in history: Two jumbo jets collided on the runway in Tenerife, killing 583 people. But the crash wasn’t due to mechanical failure. It was a behavioral failure. The KLM captain was confident — too confident. His crew noticed subtle signs that something was wrong. But no one stopped him. Why? Because in that cockpit, challenging authority felt more dangerous than crashing the plane.

Fairness Intelligence FQ

There has been a lot of talk about emotional intelligence, EQ as opposed to IQ lately. However, I have been talking about OQ—or objective intelligence—recently, but when all is said and done, they all seem to point to one thing: fairness intelligence, or FQ.

Why Has SpatzAI Not Received the Attention We Think it Deserves?

I think there are a few key reasons why SpatzAI hasn’t yet generated significant interest yet: 1. People Resist Accountability: SpatzAI focuses on holding individuals accountable for micro-conflicts, which is inherently uncomfortable for many. Most people—especially in workplace settings—avoid conflict and accountability rather than embracing it. Even though SpatzAI is designed to be fair and structured, it still means people will have their behavior scrutinized. That’s a tough sell.

A Little Tough Love for Anyone Complaining

"Here's a little tough love. We spend a lot of time talking about other people, how subjective they can be, how much they mislabel, misunderstand us, how they manipulate and gaslight us, and all of that is real. It's a problem. But let's be all the way honest. Sometimes the problem isn't them, sometimes it's us."

Turning Disagreements into Progress with SpatzAI

Many people think that disagreement itself is a problem. It’s not. Disagreement is the process by which we test ideas, challenge assumptions, and refine our thinking. In fact, the healthiest teams don’t just tolerate disagreement—they embrace it as a necessary step toward reaching a fair and well-rounded consensus.

Caution Grasshopper!

Imagine if our workplace teammates agreed that one could pause a conversation, using a 1.Caution, instead of reacting angrily, or suppressing our feelings of injustice, when we were experiencing some unfair treatment? And, if the person who was infringing on us ignored or challenged our caution, we could then up the ante by 2.Objecting to their behavior. If still no result, we could agree to 3.Stop the conversation and allow our peers to adjudicate our conflict. All without allowing our emotions to interfere in our spat. I think it is possible.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑