I’ve talked before about the value of using Mean Time To Resolution instead of Mean Time Between Failures as a guide for interpersonal relationships, and not just technical systems.
Today I want to step into the metaphor a bit more deeply and look at one specific philosophy that’s crucial for both applications of minimizing Mean Time To Resolution.
Before modern software infrastructure approaches became popular, one of the biggest delays to resolution was simply having awareness that there was a problem. I can recall numerous occasions where the way we knew that a system was in trouble was because our customer support team received a call from someone who couldn’t do their work.
By that time, the failure had already been going on far too long.
Modern architecture with quick Mean Time To Resolution places a lot of emphasis on what’s called “observability.” Systems report all sorts of metrics and telemetry which is then analyzed to determine the health of a system and even predict future failures and take proactive action.
In human relationships, we also need an observability platform. I used the word “platform,” but I don’t necessarily mean a formal piece of technology. What I mean is that we’re actively collecting information about the state of our relationships. It may be as concrete as specifically asking for feedback, or as non-intrusive as simply monitoring people’s facial expressions and body language as we communicate.
For many, though, the issue isn’t the availability of feedback. Instead, it’s their resistance to hear it.
So if you’re looking to improve the Mean Time To Resolution in your interpersonal relationships, be deliberate about showing gratitude for any feedback you hear, so people will be inclined to share more when they have it.
And if you’d like an outside observer to share honest and confidential feedback about your specific situation, let’s talk. Visit stevedwire.com/talk to start the conversation.