Consistency vs. Continuity: Can Either or Both Improve Performance?

Ralph Waldo Emerson commented that “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds…”  To an extent, every manager and leader has some of this “littleness” of mind.  Almost all long for people and process to be more consistent and predictable.  If they were more consistent, changes and improvements could be accomplished uniformly across the organization.  Sameness smacks of control and what leader doesn’t want to be in control?  But the extreme side of consistency is robotic sameness.  It contains no original thought, nor creativity.  It has no motivation to go above and beyond.  It does not question the status quo, nor long for excellence.  

Continuity, in its best form, is enough consistency to allow for aligned effort but not stifle it.  Continuity of strategy, programs, and terminology allow for individuals to work together toward a common cause with likeness of mind but room for individuality.  People can seek the same goals, use the same tools and speak the same language, but do so in their own completely unique way.  Each contribution can add up to a much greater sum with such synergy of effort.

So leaders, here is the challenge:  Can you lead without micromanaging, align without stifling, create focus without destroying individuality.  In short, can you build continuity without going too far and creating little-minded consistency?

-Terry L. Mathis

Terry L. Mathis is the founder and CEO of ProAct Safety, an international safety and performance excellence firm. He is known for his dynamic presentations in the fields of behavioral and cultural safety, leadership, and operational performance, and is a regular speaker at ASSE, NSC, and numerous company and industry conferences. EHS Today listed Terry as a Safety Guru in ‘The 50 People Who Most Influenced EHS in 2010, 2011 and 2012-2013. He has been a frequent contributor to industry magazines for over 15 years and is the coauthor of STEPS to Safety Culture Excellence, 2013, WILEY.