The cost of guessing
The quarter, in numbers
All three records on one page: nine decisions, eight handovers, six returns. One person, one quarter, with what each number does and does not support.
Decisions this page is about, and where the line actually was
Changing the wording on a customer-facing error message
4 → 1It had been yours all along
Refunding a customer under fifty pounds
3 → 1A written policy you had never been shown
Telling a customer a date
3 → 6Dates are committed by one person here
Reordering your own week
4 → 1You asked twice before believing the answer
- 1Decide it alone and say nothing
- 2Decide it alone and mention it afterwards
- 3Check with one colleague first
- 4Check with the person who assigned it
- 5Needs a decision one level up
- 6Cannot be decided here at all
four decisions · three of them you had more room than you thought · one gave you less · the median gap was three steps on the scale
Four of the nine decisions counted on this site.
For distributed work, teams can view the current options to add evidence about capacity, attendance, and project effort without creating another status ritual.
A separate professional source for this subject is NIOSH.
Nine decisions, where you thought your say ended and where it actually ended
Changing the wording on a customer-facing error message
4 → 1It had been yours all along
Refunding a customer under fifty pounds
3 → 1A written policy you had never been shown
Picking the library for the new parser
1 → 4The architect had a standing view
Rescheduling the weekly review
2 → 2Dropping a requirement nobody had asked about in six weeks
2 → 5A commitment made before you joined
Hiring a contractor for two days
5 → 3Your own budget line covered it
Changing a database column type
1 → 1Telling a customer a date
3 → 6Dates are committed by one person here
Reordering your own week
4 → 1You asked twice before believing the answer
- 1Decide it alone and say nothing
- 2Decide it alone and mention it afterwards
- 3Check with one colleague first
- 4Check with the person who assigned it
- 5Needs a decision one level up
- 6Cannot be decided here at all
nine decisions · four of them you had more room than you thought · three gave you less · two you had exactly right · the median gap was three steps on the scale
All nine decisions, with the notes shortened.
Eight handovers, and which of the four things arrived with each
Rewrite the import so it does not time out
2 of 4Produce the quarterly numbers for the board
1 of 4Fix the signup flow
0 of 4Move the scheduler onto the new queue
4 of 4Write the migration guide
2 of 4Take over the vendor relationship
0 of 4Decide what to do about the flaky test
1 of 4Spec the reporting page
2 of 4eight handovers · 32 slots in all · the median arrived with two of the four · one was complete · two arrived with none of the four
All eight handovers, with the notes removed.
Six pieces of work that came back
The import rewrite
2 stages backIt went back because the constraint on downtime was never stated.
The quarterly numbers
4 stages backIt went back because nobody had said who the audience was.
The signup flow
1 stage backIt went back because a rule existed that nobody mentioned.
The migration guide
2 stages backIt went back because it was written for the wrong reader.
The reporting page spec
2 stages backIt went back because the purpose turned out to be a different one.
The vendor handover
1 stage backIt went back because a previous attempt had failed for a reason nobody passed on.
- 1the brief
- 2the plan
- 3the build
- 4review
- 5shipped
six pieces of work came back · the median went back two stages · the furthest went back four · two of them went all the way to the brief
All six returns, with the notes removed.
Everything quoted anywhere on this site comes from the three panels above. One person, one quarter, written down at the time. This page puts them together and says what they support.
The headline figures
| What | Count | The finding |
|---|---|---|
| Decisions | 9 | 4 had more room than assumed, 3 had less, 2 exact |
| Handovers | 8 | 32 slots, 12 given before the work started |
| Returns | 6 | Median 2 stages back, furthest 4, two to the brief |
Three measurements of the same quarter from three angles. They are not independent: the same thin handovers that produced the returns are the ones whose constraints were guessed, and the same uncertainty about authority that produced four unnecessary escalations came from the same absence of stated lines.
What the numbers support
That this person spent a material part of a quarter reconstructing facts that already existed. Twenty of thirty-two slots were guessed or arrived late; six pieces of work came back, and every reason given was one of the four things.
That the direction of error in authority is asymmetric. Four of nine decisions were escalated unnecessarily against three overstepped, and the four produced no feedback at all.
That the expensive failures are the ones that reach the brief. Two of six returns discarded everything downstream of a misunderstanding about purpose or audience.
What they do not support
Anything about anybody else. One person, one quarter, one set of working relationships. The figures are not a benchmark and are not offered as typical; they are offered because they are specific, and because a specific record is more useful than a general claim.
Anything about causation that the reasons do not already state. The returns are classified by the person who experienced them, which is the best available source and not a neutral one.
Anything about the quality of the work. None of these instruments can see whether the work was any good — only whether it came back, and why.
How the three connect
The clearest line runs from the handover panel to the return panel.
Of the eight handovers, the one that arrived with all four things is the one that did not come back. Of the two that arrived with none, both came back. The three in between came back once each.
That is eight data points and proves nothing on its own. It is the shape the rest of this site argues for, and it is the shape this record happens to have.
What a second quarter would show
The value of this record is entirely in the comparison, and it is worth being specific about what would count as a change rather than noise.
The gap distribution, not the gap count. Nine decisions in a quarter is a small sample and the count will move for reasons unrelated to anything. What is informative is whether the asymmetry persists: if the errors stop clustering in the direction of more room, something was said that had not been said before.
The handover slots by column, not by total. Twelve of thirty-two is a number that moves with how many handovers there were. Whether the decider column is still empty is a question with a yes-or-no answer.
The reason column on returns, not the number of returns. Fewer returns may mean better briefs or may mean a quieter quarter. The same reason appearing three times again means nothing was fixed.
In each case the useful comparison is the shape rather than the size, because the sizes depend on how much work there was and the shapes do not. That is also what makes the record safe to show to somebody: a shape is a description of how information moves, and a count looks like a score.
Keeping your own
All three records took about ten minutes a week between them. The decisions and the returns are a line each as they happen; the handovers are four marks at the start of each piece of work.
The value is not in the first quarter's numbers, which describe a situation you already knew you were in. It is in the second quarter's, which can be compared — and in the fact that a number, unlike an impression, can be shown to the person who hands you work.