Strict or Lenient: Where is the balance?

As a father, a husband and a team leader, I frequently come across this dilemma. How much strict or lenient should I be while dealing with people towards whom I am responsible or have some form of control. Same may be the case with every one.

Feminists may object to my mentioning ‘as a husband’ in the above statement but my conventional role of ‘head of the family’ warrants that I take vital decisions which can sometimes be unpleasant in short term.

Being strict is nothing but using one’s veto power to enforce ideas, decisions or actions in line with own judgment. The basic intention is to ensure desired beneficial results or control deviations or under performance.

One natural query that comes to mind is what is the need of being strict? At least in the case of spouse and team members, who are supposed to be mature adults, ideally there should be no need for being strict. Even in case of children, they should be coached well to be able to take right decisions and actions.

Let us see the areas where one feels the need to be strict.

In case of children, it can be about acceptable behaviour, manners & courtesy, time spent on leisure activities or wasted, type and number of friends, type of dresses, involvement in religious activities, type of books to read & movies to watch, type of extra-curricular activities & hobbies, health & fitness, studies, choice of career, affairs, choice of life partner, time of marriage and so on.

In case of spouse, it can be about expenses, handling extended family and relatives, general upkeep of the house, health & fitness, grooming and care of children, children’s career etc.

In case of team members, it is generally about quality & timeliness of work, conduct & discipline, in some cases dress code, communication protocols and business critical decisions.

Almost all people live and work with a positive intention. They mean to be good and to do what is right. They want to have a balanced life fulfilling all responsibilities associated with the multiple roles they play. Almost no one wants to deliberately do anything that is wrong or harmful.

So why is there a need for someone to be strict with others? The affected person, more often than not, finds the strictness as unfair, unjust and restrictive. This is natural since the decision enforced is not in sync with his judgment.

We hear so many children, spouses and team members complaining about the parent, partner or the boss for being unduly strict. I too have felt that way many times. I am also fully aware that my daughter, wife and team feel the same about me on some occasions.

Before going deeper in to this, I want to reiterate that the choice of being strict or lenient is ultimately determined by about our judgment on the probability of getting desired results.

Based on information, knowledge, past experience and upbringing, we all create an image or expectations about a role or position. How should a person in that role or position think, talk, act, decide, behave and interact. We also form an idea about the process and activities that will lead to a particular result. Some of these expectations or ideas are generally accepted by the society at large thus forming the part of ethics, morals, principles and culture.

As a basic instinct, we trust our own judgment the most. We all consider our self as the custodian of generally accepted ethics, morals, principles and culture. I have interacted with and overheard people from the lowest rung to far above. Everyone has a distinct idea about how everyone else should behave and why his own judgment of the situation is the most accurate. We are able to trust very few people’s judgment that too after evaluating them for consistently coming up to our expectation over a prolonged period.

Rightly or wrongly, this belief in own judgment and doubt in others’ is the reason one wants to be strict.

We fear that the other person, out of immaturity, wrong prioritization or insufficient information / competence will take incorrect, less beneficial or harmful decisions. We fear that the person will give more importance to their other roles not related to us at the cost of those where we are the stake holders. We believe that it is our moral, social or official responsibility to restrain them from straying on the wrong path. We believe that consistent strictness will help the other persons change or improve their judgment and thus decisions. Or at least, it will not allow them to act in a detrimental manner till that change of heart happens.

So, what is way to ensure achievement of desired results without being unduly strict? Excess in strictness can be real or perceived also. But truth is rarely the truth. More often than not, it is the perception that is the truth. Thus we have to look at both the reality and the perception.

One initial step that can reduce the need of being strict is to distinctly spell out and clearly communicate our expectations to others. It may also be helpful to explain the reason or logic behind that particular expectation. If the person comes up with a counter idea, we should not hesitate to accept it or explain the short coming therein. Sometimes, we expect more than the usual or the norm and this has also to be clearly communicated with the compulsions forcing this over expectation. This clear communication may help enroll the person in to the idea and thus not require much monitoring or control in future.

Second step can be to regularly monitor and review the progress or behaviour. Right inputs and feedback at required time can eliminate the need for being strict at a later stage. It is difficult for a person to change or retract at advanced stages. Ego also prohibits from making major changes.

Even if we have to strictly enforce the change, it is best to explain the logic behind the difference of judgment. Many times, the other person will get convinced.

Sometimes the situations will be urgent with little opportunity to enroll or convince people. At times, the other person will be adamant and unwilling to accept other ideas and the adverse impact of his idea or action is action will be too high. In such cases, taking strict decisions becomes mandatory in the greater interest. However, it might be a better idea to interact with the affected person later and explain the logic and reason. At that time, both persons will interact in a much cooler frame of mind and thus will be more receptive. Even we may find, after cool deliberations that our strictness was unwarranted and could have been avoided. It may be too late to undo the decision or action but it can be a lesson for future.

In any case, one thing we must carefully distinguish between is the person and the decision / act. When being strict and overruling the other person’s choice, we are merely objecting to that choice, decision or act and not to the person per se.

We must strongly believe that all people are sensible, mature & respectable in their own right and have the right intentions. It is the lack of information, knowledge or competence that has made them think or act the way they did. However, if the person is defaulting repeatedly, the intention also needs to be investigated.

Taking right decisions is a skill that can be learnt and improved. It should be our continuous endeavour to support them in improving their decision making capability by providing better information, increasing their competence, coaching and letting them take minor or less consequential decisions.

In my opinion, we can be a bit stricter with our children, owing to their limited knowledge and experience while also being friendly and accessible to them. They should be encouraged to approach us with their thoughts and preferences before putting them in action.

In case of team members, we have to be only moderately strict, owing to their age and experience and thus higher sensitivities. Also there is no social or emotional bonding to absorb minor excesses. But since, professional decisions are liable to scrutinized & audited and can have major financial or legal impact, a fair amount of monitoring and control is mandatory.

At the same time, we have to be sensitive about their work life balance and personal compulsions. At the end of the day, for most people, personal commitments supersede professional ones.

Trickiest is the spouse. Today, more & more women are educated and employed. They have higher belief on their judgment. They want to have bigger say and freedom in decision making. Both husband and wife are more aware about health and finances. At the same time, with disintegration of joint family system, lesser support, advice and social pressure is available to preserve the marital bond.

This relationship needs friendship, mutual respect for each other’s capability & interests, and appreciation of each other’s extended responsibilities to thrive. Open communication and adaptability are more critical than strictness.

In human interactions, nothing is absolutely right or wrong. In this dynamic world, what is right today or in a given situation may prove to be wrong tomorrow or in a different situation.

Ultimately, improving the probability of the desired result should be most critical factor in deciding our behaviour but always backed up by open and clear communication.