Like you, I send emails and write reviews when I am pleased with how things are going. If we are going to complain or point out when things are not going well, we must praise and point out when issues are corrected or when things are just plain working well. Feedback on the good, the bad, and the just every day are needed to inform people when they get it right as much as when they get it wrong. Thank for writing this post!
This is great news! And I agree that we need to use LOTS of positive reinforcement to both (a) leverage positive changes for future changes AND (b) sustain positive changes after they are implemented. If there's no support for the change that makes the Waterman more equitable, who's to say it can't be met with some kind of pushback at some point; then we risk seeing the process regress (like far too many things these days). Complacency about good process doesn't protect it. (And, you're right, I didn't see your original SfE post about the change.)
Like you, I send emails and write reviews when I am pleased with how things are going. If we are going to complain or point out when things are not going well, we must praise and point out when issues are corrected or when things are just plain working well. Feedback on the good, the bad, and the just every day are needed to inform people when they get it right as much as when they get it wrong. Thank for writing this post!
This is great news! And I agree that we need to use LOTS of positive reinforcement to both (a) leverage positive changes for future changes AND (b) sustain positive changes after they are implemented. If there's no support for the change that makes the Waterman more equitable, who's to say it can't be met with some kind of pushback at some point; then we risk seeing the process regress (like far too many things these days). Complacency about good process doesn't protect it. (And, you're right, I didn't see your original SfE post about the change.)