Establishing standards and specifications isn’t reserved for assembly lines and factories. It’s essential in doing anything consistently well. And they’re particularly helpful in team settings to establish common ground and agreed upon practices. A productive system requires rules of order. Otherwise, it’s chaos with many outcomes left to chance.
People here do things this way to achieve the outcome we seek. The key component is “we seek”. It didn't start out this way. Working together to achieve standards has been around for thousands of years. The pyramids of Egypt were designed and built to exacting specifications. And the industrial era exponentially improved efficiency and profitability largely through the use of machinery. However, industrialization wasn’t established on collective, all encompassing, thinking. Rather, the “we” was limited…to those with economic power and authority. Historically, we have been a civilization of command and control. Those which were fortunate enough to own the tools made the rules, established the standards, and everyone else fell in line...because they had no viable alternative.
It’s far easier to command someone to do something if they're in some way subordinate to us…because we control the consequence (of not doing it). Most management is set-up this way. Do this, not that. If you do that, we’ll need to talk. This works under certain conditions. If a person is okay with being managed in this manner (not likely even if it seems so on the surface) and/or there is little or no alternative to find similar work elsewhere. This command and micro control method can be sustained until either of those conditions change. The bulk of industrialization was developed under this premise. Own the tools, create efficient systems, plug-in a trained and obedient workforce and control the outcomes. Rinse and repeat with emphasis on improving the efficiency. You’ve likely already guessed the problem. The landscape of industry has changed…quite dramatically. So, as people are more connected, educated and able to choose a better culture, they either demand a premium to remain as a cog or they leave. Either way, it’s bad for the economics of the business.
The alternative is to play for the long game (or maybe an infinite game), achieving sustained results through a legacy driven culture. Perhaps the better way is to include people in the development of the process, the practice of determining the best spec, and not just being on the hook for the achievement of the outcomes. Perhaps people value being part of something bigger than themselves, especially if they helped design it...and make it. Maybe then, they would take pride in meeting spec, not because the consequence of not doing it is a missed promotion or job loss, but because doing it supports something they own, their own legacy.
We can drive people towards a goal with authority, manipulation and fear. Or, we can persuade them to go with us willingly, on their own accord. Cultures are up to us. Choose wisely.