THE OPERATING CODE  |  003

FAIR REQUIRES JUDGMENT

The standard should be the same. How you help people reach it doesn't always have to be.

I've worked with a lot of different people over the years, and one thing I've learned is that you can't manage everybody exactly the same way and expect the same results. Some people need more direction and guidance, while others have enough experience that the best thing you can do is give them responsibility and let them do their job.

I don't believe that's playing favorites. I believe it's part of understanding the people you're responsible for and recognizing what they need to be successful.

I've had foremen who could take a complicated job, work through the problems, and keep everything moving without needing much involvement from me. I've also worked with good people who weren't quite ready for that level of independence. They needed more guidance, additional experience, or somebody willing to spend time helping them develop.

Both deserve a fair opportunity to succeed, but giving them exactly the same responsibility before they're ready wouldn't necessarily be fair to either one. The experienced foreman shouldn't have to be constantly supervised simply because somebody else needs more attention, and the person who's still learning shouldn't be expected to handle situations they haven't been prepared for.

That's where I believe good judgment comes into leadership. You have to understand what people are capable of, recognize where they need support, and give them opportunities that are appropriate for their experience.

Fairness Applies to More Than People

The same thinking applies when you're responsible for several projects. You can't always divide your time equally between them because they don't all need the same level of attention.

One project might be running smoothly with an experienced foreman and a crew that has everything under control. Another might be dealing with engineering questions, schedule conflicts, or people who need additional support. Naturally, the second project may require more of your involvement.

That doesn't mean the first project is less important or that you're giving somebody preferential treatment. It means you're paying attention to where your involvement can make the greatest difference.

I think that's an important distinction because equal treatment isn't always the same as effective leadership. Sometimes one person or project needs more of your time, while another needs the freedom to continue doing what's already working.

The responsibility is to make those decisions for legitimate reasons, not personal preferences.

Give People the Opportunity They Want

I've also learned that not everybody has the same career goals, and I don't believe they should be expected to.

Not everybody wants to become a superintendent, project manager, or director. I've worked with people who were excellent at what they did and perfectly happy doing it. They took pride in their work, knew their responsibilities, and were dependable people to have on a crew.

There's nothing wrong with that. A good organization needs experienced people who want to continue doing the work they're good at, just as much as it needs people who want to move into leadership positions.

But when somebody demonstrates both the ability and desire to take on more responsibility, I believe we should help them get there. Give them opportunities to learn, challenge them with work they're ready to handle, and make sure they understand what will be expected of them at the next level.

That doesn't mean handing somebody a position simply because they want it. They still need to demonstrate that they're capable of handling the responsibility. But if they're willing to put in the effort and show they can do the work, they deserve a fair opportunity to develop.

I've seen good people grow into leadership positions, and I've also seen people who were more valuable and happier staying in the roles they already had. I don't think either path should be treated as less important.

Keep the Standards Consistent

Of course, there's a difference between making decisions based on somebody's abilities and simply playing favorites.

If you're giving one-person better opportunities, more freedom, or additional resources because you like them, that's not fair leadership. Those decisions should have a legitimate reason behind them, and you should be able to explain why you made them.

The same principle applies to accountability. If somebody isn't meeting expectations, I want to understand what's causing the problem before deciding what needs to happen next.

Do they understand what's expected of them? Have they received the training they need? Do they have the right equipment, information, and support to do the job? Or is there something about the responsibility they've been given that they're not yet prepared to handle?

Sometimes the answer is additional training or spending more time helping somebody understand the work. Other times, it's providing clearer direction or making sure they have the resources they need.

And sometimes, after you've provided those things and given somebody a reasonable opportunity to improve, you have to have a more difficult conversation about their performance.

I don't believe fairness means avoiding those conversations. It means holding people accountable to the same expectations while being willing to understand their individual circumstances and provide reasonable support.

The standard shouldn't change depending on who you're dealing with, but the way you help somebody meet that standard may need to.

The Principle

I've learned that fairness requires more thought than simply treating everybody alike. You have to know your people, understand their abilities, recognize where they need help, and make decisions you can stand behind.

Some people will need more guidance, while others need more independence. Some projects will require more attention than others, and some employees will want opportunities that others have no interest in pursuing. None of those differences automatically make the decisions unfair.

What matters is whether the decisions are based on legitimate needs, consistent expectations, and a genuine effort to give people the opportunity to succeed.

Equal is easy. Judgment is harder.

Fair doesn't mean giving everybody the same thing. It means holding people to a consistent standard while giving them a fair opportunity to meet it.