Natural punishment
Dale Carnegie was right: As a general rule, if you want to get the most out of people, it’s not very effective to criticise them when they make mistakes. Many mistakes happen because someone did the best they could but came up short, in which case criticism makes no sense. And when they could have done better but didn’t, bringing up this fact may make them feel inadequate, embarrassed, nervous, or resentful. These feelings may push them to do better, but they might also lead to a spiral of worse performance.
I’ve found it more effective, where possible, to simply expose people to the consequences of their errors. Mistakes often lead to downstream problems, that someone or other has to address. Let the mistake-maker be responsible for that.
The message is: Mistakes happen. They’re normal, inevitable, and part of the learning process. So is cleaning up after you mess up. Growing up, both in personal and professional life, means taking responsibility for your cock-ups. Giving someone the freedom to make mistakes without condemnation is also a way of demonstrating trust.
The difference between these two methodologies is the source of the punishment. In the first case, punishment is personal. The mistake-maker learns to do better because you said so. In the second case, punishment comes from the world. They learn to do better, not because someone is breathing down their neck, but because their behaviour has naturally led to bad outcomes.
Natural punishment is better.
