From research to the workplace
Use this research in your workplace
Discuss a work situation you would like to revisit with your team.
The contact form includes this page’s title and link. Add the work situation you would like to discuss.
Workplace consulting services (Japanese)
REQUEST | Organizational-Andragogy®
338,000 participants · 980 companiesBehavioral data from our fieldwork (cumulative).
A day with the top 5% at workAn illustrated guide
How you take a request, speak at a meeting or follow up on advice.Find one habit to try in your own work.
Choose where to start ↓The top 5% addresssmall gaps in understanding.
Through experience, they have learned how small gaps in understanding can affect later work. They check the other person’s intention and share their own understanding. These small actions become everyday habits.
Action
Check the other person’s intention.
Report the result of what you tried.
Thinking
What they pay attention to
and how they think about it.
Values
What they consider
important in their work.
↶ Responses to what you try inform your next experience and judgment.
Small differences in understanding can change the work that follows.
Share of mix-ups at work
68–72%
The proportion of work-related mix-ups accounted for by small differences in understanding arising in everyday conversation.
More hesitation, rework and repeat explanations
Up to about3.2×
The observed factor of increase in later hesitation, rework and repeat explanations when work continued with differences in understanding unresolved.
Decision-making accuracy
35–40% lower
Decision-making accuracy tended to decline when the conversation continued with differences in understanding unresolved.
Patterns observed in our workplace practice. See how we observe the work ↓
Try one habit at work today
Management · Starting work Start with this one
Decide what you aim to reach today before starting work.
View this action → View all 16 habits in this scene ↓After trying it, notice what the other person said or did.
Explore the reasons behind the habits in the book →A day in management116 habits across 13 work situations.
Coordinate multiple tasks and individual decisions through support and work allocation.
Choose a situation to see the habits, our observations and three ways to interpret what happened.
Morning→Working together→Changes during the day→Before leaving
Throughout the day
13 Imagining others' workSix habits for considering the other person’s work in any situation.Start of the day
Getting started in the morning
0116 habits
Starting work
“Everyone's work is getting under way again today.”
Day overview ↑Decide what you aim to reach today before starting work.
People who decide what they aim to reach today before starting a task tend to spend 33% less time hesitating before they begin, on average.
Start in the morning on work that may become harder later in the day.
People who identify in the morning the work likely to become a problem later that day tend to have 29% fewer urgent issues to handle in the evening, on average.
Check what unfinished work is waiting for.
People who distinguish unfinished work awaiting action from work awaiting a decision tend to take 36% less time to restart it the next day, on average.
When your thinking stalls, draw the relationships or flow.
People who draw the relationships when their thinking stalls tend to overlook 33% fewer issues, on average.
Give people waiting for you an update on what to expect in the morning.
People who update those waiting for them in the morning tend to receive 33% fewer reminders or requests for clarification, on average.
Also decide what you will not work on today.
People who remove 1 task before starting tend to begin their priority work 24% sooner, on average.
Choose when to check email to suit your work.
People who decide before starting work whether to handle incoming messages first or protect time for thinking tend to have 27% fewer interruptions to concentration from unplanned responses during the morning, on average.
Scan subject lines for the messages you need before opening email.
People who sort priorities from subject lines alone tend to spend 28% less time hesitating before their first reply, on average.
Separate emails to answer now from emails to check later.
People who sort incoming emails by the type of response needed tend to receive 34% fewer requests for clarification after replying, on average.
Check the actual deadline for an urgent message.
People who separate urgent requests by their content before responding tend to have 33% less rework after handling them, on average.
Find the role expected of you in a long email.
People who read a confusing email by separating its purpose from what is expected of them tend to have 36% fewer misunderstandings after replying, on average.
Check the request in the email before opening an attachment.
People who identify what to check before opening an attachment tend to spend 34% less time reviewing the material, on average.
Identify the kind of response the other person needs before replying.
People who check what kind of reply the other person needs before responding tend to receive 39% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
Understand what the other person is trying to decide.
Including decision criteria in a reply is associated with 38% fewer follow-up email exchanges on average.
If you cannot answer right away, first say when you can reply.
People who give an expected reply time when they cannot answer immediately tend to receive 44% fewer reminders from the other person, on average.
When you feel unsettled, choose one first action.
Behavioral observations show that people who decide on even one first action at the start of the workday tend to make 33% fewer emotionally driven replies or remarks, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
The order in which a manager starts work affects team members waiting for decisions. Understanding who is waiting for what among yesterday’s unfinished matters gives clues for today’s priorities.
Art Thinking
Redraw the intended outcome and the connections between tasksRead explanationClose explanation＋
Setting today’s outcome and mapping unfinished work and its connections helps identify where the team has stopped and who needs what. Check the response others need and choose what not to take on. Reconsider the day the manager imagined through what is needed in practice.
Logical Sensemaking®
Distinguish the request’s wording from the work actually neededRead explanationClose explanation＋
Separating work waiting for action from work waiting for a decision connects with reading incoming requests as a way to understand the work’s state. Compare the subject, expected role, points to check, and real deadline. Build an understanding that does not rely on the word “urgent” alone.
Judgment Design®
Choose the morning’s order and the conditions that let others actRead explanationClose explanation＋
Separate time for messages from time for thinking, and choose what to answer now and later. Giving waiting people an expectation helps them make their own plans. Decide a first action for moments when emotions shift, and consider the time and contacts supporting both the manager’s and team members’ decisions.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑025 habits
Receiving a task
“I want to meet expectations, but I am concerned about our capacity.”
Day overview ↑Restate a request in your own understanding of it.
People who check their understanding in one sentence immediately after receiving a request tend to have 34% fewer misunderstandings or revisions sent back after the work, on average.
State your understanding, then deepen your understanding of the other person’s work.
Reply in one sentence and hear what the other person adds. Use that response to reconsider your understanding and approach.
01State your understanding in one sentence
Management
02Hear what the other person adds
Department head
03Revise your understanding and approach
Check with team members why work has stalled. Alongside progress, summarize the support needed and when it is needed.
Check the meaning you supplied yourself, and revisit the purpose if needed. Take unresolved questions to the people or situations that can help clarify them.
Check what information the department head still needed to choose support, then what team members did afterward.
Why can the same words bring different work to mind?
People construct meaning using what they know and what seems important in the situation, as well as the words they hear. The following studies examine differences in those cues.
Knowledge and context guide understanding
Across several experiments, Bransford and Johnson discuss how comprehension and memory draw on a reader’s knowledge and the context provided, as well as the words themselves. At work, sharing a document’s intended use and situation can help people clarify what the words mean.
Bransford & Johnson (1973)Perspective changes which information matters
Experiments in which participants read the same stories from different perspectives found that information important to the assigned perspective was more likely to be learned and later recalled. At work, different purposes and uses can similarly lead people to give different weight to the same material.
Pichert & Anderson (1977)You and the other person may see different things
In experiments involving instructions to move objects, listeners looked even at objects the speaker could not see. The work showed a process of revising interpretations in light of what the speaker could see. At work, check which documents and conditions each person has in view.
Keysar et al. (2000)Browse research on dialogue and shared understanding →
Name the work in terms of what it is useful for.
People who put the purpose of the work into one sentence before starting tend to receive 32% fewer requests for revision after submitting it, on average.
Check who will use the work and in what situation.
People who check who will use a document and in what situation before preparing it tend to receive 33% fewer requests for clarification after submitting it, on average.
Check the reactions of people you cannot meet directly through records or those who deal with them.
People who check reactions with someone who actually dealt with the other person before preparing a document or considering a proposal tend to receive 30% fewer requests for revision after submitting it, on average.
Remember that the relationship will continue before replying.
Behavioral observations show that people who consider the future relationship when replying in an emotional situation tend to encounter 30% fewer later instances of holding back from seeking advice or delayed reporting, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
Beyond a request are the people who will use the result and the team members who will do the work. Consider the request’s intention together with team capacity to judge how much can be accepted.
Art Thinking
Explore a form of work that helps the other personRead explanationClose explanation＋
Naming the task and checking its users and use opens questions about what the work helps, as well as what to make. Learn from colleagues and records about people you cannot meet, and reconsider the manager’s assumed result. Show unfinished forms while exploring the work that is needed.
Logical Sensemaking®
Compare received words with the other person’s circumstancesRead explanationClose explanation＋
Connect sharing your understanding with checking actual use and responses. Do not understand the work from the requested words alone; check whether that meaning fits the other person’s situation. Consider the continuing relationship and revisit mismatches through dialogue.
Judgment Design®
Gather the clues needed to decide before accepting the workRead explanationClose explanation＋
Checking purpose and use helps distinguish what the manager must decide from what can be entrusted to team members. Create opportunities to compare understanding before starting as well as after completion. Retain a way to learn the other person’s response and reflect on choices about the finished work.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑0315 habits
Email and chat
“Perhaps I have kept them waiting for my reply.”
Day overview ↑State clearly what you want the other person to do.
People who put the action they want from the other person into one sentence before sending a message tend to receive 35% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
State whether the purpose is checking, deciding, or sharing in the subject line or opening.
People who state the purpose in the subject line or opening tend to receive 37% fewer follow-up questions asking what needs to be checked, on average.
State the request or direction first, then give the background.
People who put the purpose first in a long email tend to receive 38% fewer questions asking what the recipient is supposed to do, on average.
Put the deadline and what needs checking near the beginning.
People who put the deadline near the beginning tend to see 34% fewer instances of the deadline being overlooked or checked again, on average.
Say specifically where you want the other person to look in a document.
People who specify what to check when sending an attachment tend to receive 31% fewer repeat checks from the recipient, on average.
Say whether a reply is needed and what you want in it.
People who state before sending whether a reply is needed tend to have 36% fewer clarification exchanges afterward, on average.
Bring the main point together before sending.
People who bring their message down to 1 main point before sending a series of chat messages tend to have 35% fewer clarification exchanges afterward, on average.
Add a brief explanation where the reader may be unsure.
People who add a brief explanation of a point the recipient may be unsure about before sending tend to have 34% fewer clarification exchanges afterward, on average.
Frame a difficult message as something you want to check.
People who soften their wording before sending a difficult message tend to receive 32% fewer defensive replies afterward, on average.
Say when a response is needed in messages sent outside working hours.
People who add a note such as no reply needed or tomorrow or later is fine to messages sent outside working hours tend to receive 31% fewer unnecessary immediate replies, on average.
If you want to reply immediately, save a draft and review it.
People who save an emotional reply as a draft and review it tend to make 37% fewer corrections or follow-up apologies after sending, on average.
Before replying, check that you have answered the question.
People who reread the intention behind the other person's question before replying tend to receive 36% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
Step away briefly, then review the message from the reader's position.
People who leave a reply they are unsure about for a short time before reviewing it tend to make 33% fewer corrections or supplementary replies after sending, on average.
Close the exchange with words that leave room for future consultation.
People who add how to proceed next at the end of a reply tend to receive early requests for advice from the same person 27% more often, on average.
Adjust words that will remain on record so their assumptions are clear.
Behavioral observations show that people who review an objection with its lasting record in mind tend to make 35% fewer corrections or supplementary messages after sending, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
A short question from a team member may have a customer waiting behind it. What is already decided and how much discretion the team member had can change how the same message is understood.
Art Thinking
Shape the message around the situation in which the reader must actRead explanationClose explanation＋
Deciding the action requested and pointing to the relevant material connect with imagining how the reader will use the message. Notice questions from team members and colleagues, then revisit the placement of key points and explanations. Before sending more, consider what will help the reader’s work.
Logical Sensemaking®
Compare the message with the response to understand what was conveyedRead explanationClose explanation＋
Check before and after sending whether you answered the question and left potential confusion. Saving a draft and reading it later can reveal differences between intention and wording. Compare the recorded words with actual replies and reconsider your interpretation.
Judgment Design®
Communicate in a way that protects time and room to decideRead explanationClose explanation＋
State the deadline, whether a reply is needed, and what to examine. For after-hours messages, explain when action is needed. Check whether team members face unnecessary demands for instant replies. Express difficult matters as things to check and close with wording that keeps consultation possible, as conditions supporting judgment.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑Time spent working together
Working with other people
0417 habits
Meetings
“Everyone is working, yet their tasks overlap.”
What to look forWhere does work overlap? Who has not had a chance to speak?
Day overview ↑Decide what to focus on before entering the next meeting.
People who set aside emotions from a previous appointment before the next one tend to make 34% fewer corrections or overly rushed explanations in the next conversation, on average.
Say where you want people to look before explaining a document.
People who specify the page or section to look at before explaining tend to receive 42% fewer questions about where to look during meetings, on average.
Keep your explanation brief and leave time for the other person to think.
People who decide before a meeting to shorten their own explanation tend to hear 32% more contributions from participants during the meeting, on average.
Consider the other person's likely concerns in advance.
People who anticipate 1 likely objection before a meeting tend to make 34% fewer revisions to their explanation after an objection is raised, on average.
Check from another position even when everyone seems to agree.
People who ask about problems faced by those doing the work during meetings tend to receive 33% fewer requests for clarification after meetings, on average.
When opinions differ, check the assumptions behind each one.
People who note the assumptions behind conflicting opinions during meetings tend to carry 34% fewer unresolved issues into later discussions, on average.
Wait 2 seconds before filling a silence.
People who habitually pause rather than immediately speak into a silence during meetings tend to hear 29% more additional contributions from participants, on average.
Ask about the specific problem behind strong words.
People who reinterpret a forceful remark in a meeting as a sign of a problem tend to have 32% fewer confrontational exchanges afterward, on average.
Check what information is missing before speaking.
People who clarify their purpose before speaking tend to have 31% fewer digressions caused by introducing additional issues during meetings, on average.
Create an opening for someone who has been quiet to speak.
People who check the expressions and reactions of participants who have not spoken during meetings tend to hear 33% fewer additional concerns after the meeting, on average.
Use the other person's own words to continue the conversation.
People who first acknowledge the other person's words before speaking during meetings tend to receive 34% fewer objections or defensive replies afterward, on average.
Note what feels wrong so you can check it later.
People who note a concern as something to check rather than immediately objecting during meetings tend to have 30% fewer confrontational exchanges in the meeting, on average.
After a meeting or business discussion, ask what was difficult to say there.
People who briefly ask after a meeting about concerns that were difficult to raise or obstacles to implementation tend to have 32% fewer implementation holds or decisions sent back for revision, on average.
Record the owner, deadline, and next action in the meeting notes.
People who clarify the owner, deadline, and 1 next action immediately after a meeting tend to have 35% fewer delays in implementation afterward, on average.
Tell the person who will act next about the agreed direction promptly.
People who briefly pass the outcome of a meeting to the first person who needs to act that same day tend to have 36% fewer gaps in confirmation before the next meeting, on average.
Note words the other person repeats and use them in your next preparation.
People who record words the other person repeated after a meeting tend to have 36% fewer misunderstandings in the next interaction, on average.
When emotions run high, narrow down what needs deciding now to one thing.
Behavioral observations show that people who bring a heated conversation back to the issue tend to leave 30% fewer matters undecided afterward, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
Sharing progress does not mean every participant faces the same difficulty. Connect the background of comments with work after the meeting to consider where tasks overlap and who needs support.
Art Thinking
Broaden the question through different voicesRead explanationClose explanation＋
Set aside emotions from an earlier meeting, imagine concerns, and check another position even when agreement continues. Silence and views that were hard to voice can reopen the manager’s question. Compare unfinished ideas while exploring possibilities that include what participants consider important.
Logical Sensemaking®
Connect what lies behind comments with responses after the meetingRead explanationClose explanation＋
Acknowledge others’ words and check the difficulties behind strong comments and conflicting assumptions. Record repeated words, unease, and concerns voiced later. Do not infer the reason from forceful delivery alone. Compare what happened before and afterward to update the manager’s understanding of the issue.
Judgment Design®
Connect a place to think with conditions for actionRead explanationClose explanation＋
Bring attention to the same material, keep explanations brief, and allow time to think and speak. Check missing information and return heated discussion to the decision needed now. Afterward, record responsibilities, deadlines, and next actions and reach those who will act. Make it possible to reflect on the judgment through implementation.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑059 habits
Seeking advice
“Is this something I should decide on my own?”
Day overview ↑Prepare a tentative proposal before asking for advice.
People who prepare 1 tentative proposal before asking for advice tend to receive 34% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
Separate the facts, tentative proposal, and uncertainties when asking for advice.
People who separate the facts, proposal, and uncertainties before seeking advice tend to have 36% less backtracking during the discussion, on average.
Show what each option offers and what it makes harder.
People who clarify the advantages and concerns for each option before seeking advice tend to receive 33% fewer requests for clarification during the discussion, on average.
Keep the advice you receive in a short phrase you can use at work.
People who briefly note the advice immediately after a discussion tend to repeat the same request for advice 32% less often, on average.
Understand the decision criteria behind the advice.
People who reflect on the reasons behind advice after a discussion tend to seek the same type of advice 30% less often, on average.
Note the difference between what you and the adviser were looking at.
People who note 1 difference between their own thinking and the advice afterward tend to repeat the same type of request for advice 31% less often, on average.
Decide how to use the advice in your next piece of work.
People who decide after receiving advice what to do next time in the same situation tend to seek advice again on the same topic 33% less often, on average.
After using advice, briefly report what happened.
People who report the results after receiving advice tend to receive additional advice from their manager or a more experienced colleague in later discussions at about 1.5 times the frequency.
When emotions arise, reply briefly and return to checking the work.
Behavioral observations show that people who shorten their replies or remarks when emotions arise tend to have 31% less unnecessary broadening of the discussion afterward, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
An issue a manager takes to their own manager also involves team members’ and customers’ circumstances. Differences between a tentative idea and the advice can reveal the criteria used to choose the team’s direction.
Art Thinking
Use a tentative idea as material for developing the questionRead explanationClose explanation＋
Add strengths and concerns to an unfinished idea so you can consider together what you want to achieve. Differences between the advice and your view can also reopen the manager’s assumptions. Explore possibilities, including support for team members, by checking an idea before it is complete.
Logical Sensemaking®
Understand differences between advice and your own interpretationRead explanationClose explanation＋
Present facts, a tentative idea, and uncertainty separately, and record the advice and its reasons. Compare what you overlooked with the conditions the adviser emphasized. Even when emotions shift, keep the discussion focused. Use the response to your report of results as another clue for updating your understanding.
Judgment Design®
Retain a choice about using advice and a chance to reflect on resultsRead explanationClose explanation＋
Do not end consultation at receiving an answer. The manager decides what to adopt and how to use it next. After trying it, report the result briefly and check it with the adviser. For team members’ consultations too, consider time and relationships that allow them to bring ideas, obtain support, and learn from their choices.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑067 habits
Asking someone to help
“I want to entrust the work to them, but I still have concerns.”
Day overview ↑Provide the information the other person needs to begin the work.
People who bring together the purpose, deadline, and reference material before making a request tend to have 36% fewer clarification exchanges afterward, on average.
Prepare an alternative before asking, in case the request is difficult.
People who prepare a backup plan before making a request tend to have 31% less time when the work is stalled afterward, on average.
Add that difficulties can be raised while the work is still in progress.
People who ask others to consult them early if a request proves difficult tend to receive 32% fewer reports of unfinished work just before the deadline, on average.
Make the first task small when asking someone to start.
People who divide a difficult request into small parts when explaining it tend to have 34% fewer delays in getting started afterward, on average.
Tell the other person what their help made possible.
People who give specific feedback on how the help was useful after a request tend to receive cooperation 30% sooner the next time they ask, on average.
Keep a record of a request that helped the work move forward so you can use it again.
People who note what worked well in how they made a request tend to have 28% less rework the next time they ask, on average.
When responses do not match, review the assumptions you communicated.
Behavioral observations show that people who review the assumptions they communicated when the other person's response does not match tend to have 31% fewer clarification exchanges of the same kind, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
When a manager delegates work, judgment begins for the team member. How they understand its purpose and what they can decide independently become clues for revisiting how the work was entrusted.
Art Thinking
Keep checking the form of the work after askingRead explanationClose explanation＋
Sharing the purpose, preparing an alternative, and requesting a small initial task are ways to explore the work together. Use responses along the way to reconsider the approach and result the manager assumed. Explain what helped while exploring requests that let the other person use their strengths.
Logical Sensemaking®
Compare the request’s assumptions with actual responsesRead explanationClose explanation＋
Even if you provided the purpose, deadline, and materials, the other person may not have understood the same work. Use questions about difficulties and mismatched responses to revisit the assumptions you conveyed. Record useful help and ways of asking that moved the work forward, connecting them to your next understanding.
Judgment Design®
Create conditions to start, consult, and use experience next timeRead explanationClose explanation＋
Alongside materials and a deadline, provide an alternative for difficulties and opportunities to consult. Even when reducing the first task, consider the person’s discretion. After action, explain specifically what helped. Both the person and the manager can then reflect on experience to use in later judgments.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑079 habits
Giving an update
“I want to explain the situation on the ground properly.”
Day overview ↑Start a report with the information the other person needs to decide.
People who begin a report with what helps the recipient tend to receive 34% fewer follow-up questions afterward, on average.
Decide how to state the subject briefly before reporting.
People who put the purpose of a report into one sentence beforehand tend to receive 38% fewer questions from their manager asking what the report is about, on average.
Clarify what you want the other person to decide before reporting.
People who identify 1 decision they want before reporting tend to receive 35% fewer requests for clarification from their manager, on average.
Explain what the numbers mean for the work.
People who briefly explain the meaning of numbers when reporting them tend to receive 36% fewer requests for clarification from their manager, on average.
Limit the options you seek advice on to two, and make the comparison clear.
People who narrow their options to no more than 2 tend to receive 33% fewer questions from their manager asking which option is better, on average.
Include your own proposed approach when asking for a decision.
People who include their own assessment before asking for a decision tend to receive 32% fewer requests for clarification from their manager, on average.
Consider who or which departments the decision will affect before reporting.
People who clarify who or which departments a decision will affect before reporting tend to receive 34% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
Anticipate what the other person may ask and include that information first.
People who anticipate what their manager is likely to ask next before reporting tend to receive 34% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
When emotions arise, take time to check before deciding.
Behavioral observations show that people who avoid an immediate decision when emotions arise and briefly say they need time to check tend to revise 34% fewer decisions later, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
A senior manager reading team figures may need to decide staffing or deadlines. Connect what is happening in practice with the work the decision will change to see which comparisons the report needs.
Art Thinking
Consider the work that lies beyond each optionRead explanationClose explanation＋
Prepare your interpretation and alternatives, and imagine the people and departments affected by the decision. Use diagrams or unfinished ideas to compare whose situation you want to change and how. This can reopen the report’s assumptions. Alongside explaining the manager’s idea, check together the working situation you aim to create.
Logical Sensemaking®
Connect figures and requests with the meaning of the decision-maker’s workRead explanationClose explanation＋
Clarify the topic and requested decision. Separate the situation indicated by the figures from your interpretation. Consider what the reader will want to know next and who is affected. Check how the same information means different things across roles, and revisit your understanding through responses to the report.
Judgment Design®
Provide information and time for the other person to compare and chooseRead explanationClose explanation＋
Match alternatives, comparison points, and information about affected people to the decision requested. When emotions run high, take time to check before deciding. Whether asking a senior manager for a decision or receiving a team member’s report, consider conditions for revisiting the chosen reasons and results.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑What happens in one exchange shapes the next person’s work.
Breaks and unexpected events
Adjusting as the day unfolds
086 habits
Restroom and breaks
“I am still thinking about how hurriedly I spoke.”
Day overview ↑Exhale as you flush, and decide what to do first when you return.
People who pause for 3–5 seconds in the restroom just after feeling rushed, rather than returning immediately, tend to have 31% fewer follow-up checks after conversations, on average.
Check your expression in the mirror before meeting someone.
People who check their own expression before a one-to-one conversation, business discussion, or meeting have been observed to hear 27% more from the other person at the beginning, on average.
Reflect on how you spoke together with the other person's reaction.
People who briefly reflect on how they spoke and the other person's reaction have been observed to encounter 33% fewer delayed reports or instances of holding back from seeking advice in later interactions, on average.
When you feel rushed, separate decisions needed now from decisions that can wait.
People who separate decisions when they feel rushed have been observed to have 35% fewer later changes of decision or repeated checks, on average.
Tell yourself what to do first, even if you do not feel fully settled.
People who briefly decide what to do first before returning to their desk after feeling discouraged tend to have 31% fewer repeated work-related checks after returning, on average.
If you are about to reply impulsively, do one different action first.
Behavioral observations show that people who insert 1 action unrelated to replying just after emotions arise, rather than replying immediately, tend to make 31% fewer corrections after conversations, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
How did a team member understand instructions given in a hurry? During a brief pause away from your desk, separate your anxiety from the actual exchange so you can reconsider how to engage on return.
Art Thinking
Notice your state and reconsider how to relate to othersRead explanationClose explanation＋
Checking your expression in a mirror and reflecting on wording and responses opens observation of your own involvement. After a short pause, imagine the dialogue you want with a team member. Use the next exchange to revisit how you communicate and build the relationship.
Logical Sensemaking®
Separate feelings from events to understand the response neededRead explanationClose explanation＋
When anxious or discouraged, consider whether you are treating the other person’s response and the state of the work as having the same meaning as your feelings. Compare wording and responses, and separate what needs deciding now from what to check later. Do not make feelings the final explanation; prepare your understanding of the next action.
Judgment Design®
Create a pause from which a decision can resumeRead explanationClose explanation＋
Exhaling, doing something else, and separating decisions can create distance from a reflexive reply. Choose the first action on return so you can begin necessary checks or consultation. Both managers and team members need time to examine the situation and choose again.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑098 habits
Handling problems
“Is too much of the burden falling on one person?”
Day overview ↑Clarify the impact of a problem and the first response to take.
People who clarify who is affected and the initial response before reporting bad news tend to receive 38% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
State what actually happened in the first report.
People who note only the facts of what happened before reporting bad news tend to have 35% fewer repeated checks of the facts afterward, on average.
Check the scope of the impact before explaining the cause.
People who check the scope of the impact before reporting bad news tend to receive 36% fewer requests for clarification afterward, on average.
Along with apologizing, consider what the other person needs to move their work forward.
People who clarify the other person's difficulties before reporting bad news tend to give 33% fewer repeated explanations or additional apologies afterward, on average.
State the situation and initial response before explaining the circumstances.
People who remove words that could sound like excuses before reporting bad news tend to give 32% fewer additional explanations or corrections afterward, on average.
Say what is not yet certain, what you will check, and when.
People who clearly state what is still uncertain in an interim report and when more will be known tend to receive 40% fewer repeat checks or reminders from their manager, on average.
Separate what you know from what you do not yet know.
People who separate what they know from what they do not yet know before reporting bad news tend to have 34% fewer repeated checks of the facts afterward, on average.
When emotions arise, check what is actually happening.
Behavioral observations show that people who begin by checking the facts when emotions arise tend to have 32% fewer confrontational exchanges after the conversation, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
The same delay may have different effects on customers and on the workload of people responding. How much is known also affects who can choose which response now.
Art Thinking
Consider the response through the people experiencing difficultyRead explanationClose explanation＋
Beyond an apology and an explanation, attend to what affected people need. Use confirmed facts and their circumstances to consider the first response. After action is underway, reconsider the manager’s support and work arrangements, exploring forms that avoid the same kind of difficulty.
Logical Sensemaking®
Read the situation by separating facts, interpretation, and uncertaintyRead explanationClose explanation＋
Even when emotions shift, keep what happened separate from explanations of its cause. Check effects, difficulties, and unknowns. Before presenting an explanation as a conclusion, compare team members’ and others’ accounts with records. Update your understanding as new facts emerge.
Judgment Design®
Clarify who handles the initial response and the next checksRead explanationClose explanation＋
Separate action possible with current information from judgments awaiting confirmation. Establish who checks the effects, who decides, and when an update will come. Communicating uncertainty also shares the state of decision material. Revisit support and opportunities to check as the situation changes.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑108 habits
When work gets busy
“It might be faster if I do it myself.”
Day overview ↑Check what the other person actually needs before adding more work.
People who check which customer decision the work will support before adding more work tend to have 31% less work to redo later, on average.
Understand whose work a requested task will help and how.
People who check whose work the task will move forward and in what way before starting tend to have 29% less work to redo after submitting it, on average.
First write down the work on your mind.
People who write out their tasks when busy tend to spend 32% less time hesitating before starting, on average.
Take care of a small matter that is weighing on your mind first.
People who first handle 1 short task when busy tend to take 28% less time to restart their next main task, on average.
When work overlaps, check the order in which to proceed.
People who check the order of work early when they have taken on too much tend to have 34% fewer unplanned delays, on average.
Separate being busy into workload, uncertainty, and waiting.
People who separate their work by type when busy tend to spend 30% less time hesitating before starting, on average.
Look for ways to reduce the scope before taking on too much.
People who first look for ways to reduce their work when busy tend to have 27% less unplanned overtime that day, on average.
Slow your speech a little when emotions run high.
Behavioral observations show that people who deliberately slow their speech when emotions arise tend to encounter guarded reactions from the other person 29% less often, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
When work overlaps, a manager faces more choices about taking it over or entrusting it to a team member. Someone with many tasks and someone waiting for a decision need different kinds of support.
Art Thinking
Reconsider what is needed before trying to process moreRead explanationClose explanation＋
Check what the other person actually needs and whose work each task helps. Lay out the tasks and reconsider how to reduce scope and the assumptions the manager carries. Even when busy, consider the value and form of work through team members’ and colleagues’ circumstances.
Logical Sensemaking®
Compare the sources of busyness with what the work meansRead explanationClose explanation＋
Write down the work on your mind and distinguish volume, uncertainty, and waiting. This connects a feeling of busyness with concrete conditions. Check the purpose and order with the person doing the work. Before trying to move things faster with forceful words, revisit your understanding of the response needed.
Judgment Design®
Choose the order and match support to the loadRead explanationClose explanation＋
Consider completing small requests, discussing priorities, and reducing scope together. Arrange time, information, and contacts to match volume, uncertainty, and waiting. Before urging speed, check the person’s discretion and needed support, then return to see the situation after the response.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑116 habits
Receiving corrective feedback
“There are things I thought I had already communicated.”
Day overview ↑When you receive feedback, ask what to change next.
People who check what to improve immediately after being corrected tend to have the same issue raised again 34% less often, on average.
Understand feedback as an action you can change next time.
People who understand feedback in terms of specific actions tend to take 32% less time to begin making improvements after being corrected, on average.
Extract a point you can use next time from strong words.
People who extract 1 usable point after being corrected tend to show a rate of behavioral improvement afterward about 1.5 times as high.
Tell the person who gave feedback what action you will change next.
People who respond to feedback with a specific corrective action tend to receive the same correction 31% less often, on average.
On the day you receive feedback, note one action you can change from tomorrow.
People who decide on 1 action to change after being corrected tend to have 30% less uncertainty about how to begin work the next day, on average.
Check your current role before replying.
Behavioral observations show that people who check their own role before replying when emotions arise tend to make 29% fewer corrections after the conversation, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
Feedback to a manager can show how their communication affected someone’s work. Compare the situation that caused difficulty with the words you chose to consider the next behavior to change.
Art Thinking
Use feedback to explore another way of relatingRead explanationClose explanation＋
Asking what to correct and identifying usable content in strong words can open a reconsideration of the work. Consider the situation you want to create as a manager and sketch a small next change in behavior. Explore other approaches through team members’ and colleagues’ responses.
Logical Sensemaking®
Separate an evaluation of yourself from behavior to correctRead explanationClose explanation＋
Do not turn the feedback directly into a judgment of yourself. Connect it with the actual situation and behavior. Check what needs changing and compare it with your role and overlooked conditions. Read the response after communicating your next change to update your understanding of your own work.
Judgment Design®
Create a chance to try the chosen improvement and review resultsRead explanationClose explanation＋
After being corrected, choose the next behavior to change, tell the other person, and record it for tomorrow’s work. Connect the manager’s own choice of improvement with chances to try and learn responses. When giving feedback to team members, also consider conditions for them to judge, act, and learn from results.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑Even an ordinary day brings changes of plan and moments when emotions run high.
End of the day
Carrying today’s work into tomorrow
124 habits
Before leaving work
“Will the people doing the work tomorrow know where to start?”
Day overview ↑Keep unanswered questions as work to check next.
People who note unanswered items in a checklist after handling a matter tend to leave 34% fewer items without a reply, on average.
Reflect what you hear about the other person's schedule and workload in your plans.
People who note the other person's schedule or workload from an informal conversation and adjust their own plans tend to have 31% fewer waits for confirmation or requests needing to be reissued the next day, on average.
Write down what to start with tomorrow.
People who decide on 1 first action for the next day before finishing work tend to spend 33% less time hesitating before starting the next morning, on average.
When expressing dissatisfaction, state the conditions the work needs.
Behavioral observations show that people who explain why something causes difficulty in terms of the work standards they value, when dissatisfied with someone, tend to receive 33% fewer defensive responses after raising the issue, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
An unanswered matter with the manager may affect a team member’s start tomorrow. What is undecided and who can decide when change which information should be left today.
Art Thinking
Shape tomorrow through unfinished work and others’ circumstancesRead explanationClose explanation＋
Consider unanswered matters alongside schedules and workloads learned in brief conversations. Reword dissatisfaction with others as conditions you want the work to achieve. Before fixing the manager’s schedule alone, imagine people doing the work and redraw the plan and form of support.
Logical Sensemaking®
Understand why work remains unfinished and what conditions are needed nextRead explanationClose explanation＋
Leave unanswered matters as checks to make, and compare the other person’s schedule with your plan. Rather than explaining dissatisfaction only as a judgment of the person, consider which work criterion is unmet. Reinterpret today’s events and connect them with what to check tomorrow.
Judgment Design®
Enable the person and others to resume decisions tomorrowRead explanationClose explanation＋
Record whom to ask about unanswered matters, when the other person can respond, and the first action tomorrow. Put needed work conditions into words and clarify what the manager and team member each decide. Create a route back to what happened after today’s choice, so plans and actual results can be compared.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑Throughout the day
Looking ahead to the people your work reaches
136 habits
Imagining others' work
“Where might that person be uncertain?”
Day overview ↑Record the other person's reaction as something that happened.
People who note the other person's reaction as a fact rather than immediately judging it tend to have 31% fewer clarification exchanges in the next interaction, on average.
Consider the situation behind the other person's words and actions.
People who consider the situation before replying when something in the other person's words or actions feels wrong tend to give 33% fewer additional explanations afterward, on average.
Reply with the other person's next explanation or decision in mind.
People who imagine those beyond the person they are replying to tend to receive 34% fewer repeat checks afterward, on average.
Note what would be useful to communicate in the next interaction.
People who note what would be useful to communicate next after dealing with someone tend to spend 29% less time preparing for the next interaction, on average.
Note the questions that arise when you imagine the other person's situation.
People who note what to ask next tend to take 33% less time to understand the other person's difficulty in the next conversation, on average.
Put an assumption you took for granted into one sentence.
Behavioral observations show that people who put their own assumptions into one sentence before speaking when emotions arise tend to have repeated conflicts with the same person 27% less often, on average.
Understand this scene’s actions through three perspectives
When a team member stops speaking, their expression alone cannot tell you whether they are organizing their thoughts or unsure what they may decide. Separating the actual response from the manager’s interpretation is a starting point for considering the support needed.
Art Thinking
Move between observation and imagination to broaden possible supportRead explanationClose explanation＋
Record responses and imagine the background of surprising actions and the people involved further along. Leave these as points to communicate or questions to check, then revisit assumptions through the person’s account. Putting the manager’s own sense of “normal” into words can also open a search for needs not yet visible.
Logical Sensemaking®
Compare recorded responses with your assumptionsRead explanationClose explanation＋
Record what happened without immediately evaluating the response. Distinguish why you imagined a background from assumptions you took for granted, and compare both with the person’s account and circumstances. Use the next exchange to understand what you learned, keeping the manager’s interpretation open to revision.
Judgment Design®
Connect the next question and response with judgment experienceRead explanationClose explanation＋
While noting what to communicate and ask, consider what the other person will need to decide next. Adjust information, discretion, and support to the situation checked together. Beyond preparing questions, create contact for revisiting the chosen response and what came back from the other person.
How might you put this into words at work? See a book example across three roles →
Choose another situation ↑See the day from another role
Try your chosen action, then decide what comes next.
Check the response after trying it, then choose the action your work needs now.
After trying it, choose from your current situation.
Reflect on the other person’s response and how the work progressedWhat words did you send back next?
Choose the description closest to your situation to find a habit to use next.
Choose from other work situations
Check the data and why this may help
Why this action may help
Choosing one small task on an irritated morning can create a pause between the impulse to reply and actually sending your words to someone.
See the observations for this habit ↑Analysis by Request Co., Ltd.
Move between three perspectives as you examine the work.
As new things become clear, revisit the aim, your understanding of the work, and the conditions for making a judgment.
An example from Management
The proposal documents are ready, but team members’ work has stopped.
Art Thinking
Reconsider what to aim for.
Explore new ways the team could help, starting from what customers and team members want to achieve.
See how this perspective works
Reconsider the purpose of support and the form of work through observing team members at work.
Read a work situation through this perspective
Read the detailed explanation (in Japanese) ↗Logical Sensemaking®
Reconsider what happened and what it means.
Compare work records with team members’ accounts, check which information or decisions they await, and update your understanding.
See how this perspective works
Compare team members’ accounts with work records to update your interpretation of the support needed.
Read a work situation through this perspective
Read the detailed explanation (in Japanese) ↗Judgment Design®
Carry judgment experience into the next task.
Arrange information, time, discretion, and support so team members can choose an approach, then reflect on the result together.
See how this perspective works
Create working conditions in which both managers and team members can revisit the reasons for their choices and the results.
Read a work situation through this perspective
Read the detailed explanation (in Japanese) ↗Choose, act, and observe the other person’s responseCheck what team members chose and how customers and others responded.
↶Revisit the question, your understanding, and the conditions for judgment
Research and practice behind this page.
We bring theory and academic research into dialogue with behavioral records and experience gathered through workplace practice.
Theory and academic research
Behavioral science ·Experiential learning · Adult learning · Self-determination theory · Self-efficacy
Our behavioral records and workplace practice
980 companies · 338,000 people
The cumulative scale of our work through training, workplace support and behavioral observation.
Organizational-Andragogy®
A framework for developing a sense of purpose, ways of seeing work and judgment through experience.
Bringing everyday actions and workplace records together.
Behavioral observation
What people communicated first and what they checked in reports, consultations and meetings.
1-on-1s and dialogue
What they were trying to decide, where they were uncertain and what advice they needed.
Work logs and reflection
How they understood events, what they noticed and what they intended to change next.
Workplace practice tasks
The small action they tried, the other person’s response and what they did afterward.
Following real work over time.
Initiatives involving continuing observation and testing in practice
A more extensive initiative
7yearsContinuing the work and following leaders’ activityWho we have observed
Those observed include leadership candidates recognized for their results within their departments, and people already leading departments.
What we examine in real work
We compare patterns among people who did and did not take a particular action in the same kind of work situation, and organize the differences observed in how work progressed.
What was uncertain or stalled before the work moved forward.
What they put into a sentence, separated out or shared first.
Differences in clarification exchanges, rework, reminders, repeat explanations and time before starting.
Use the response to inform the next work decision.
Five perspectives and their connection to habits
Try one action in your own work, then turn the experience into your next action. We consider this process through five perspectives.
in your work
response
Deepen your perspective through external research.
Explore academic research across eight fields.
67 publications on action, thinking and values. Choose a field to read what the research found and how it connects to this page.