Share on LinkedIn
Why do we insist on seeking perfect tools and forget to communicate the purpose?
Throughout my career, I have observed a recurring pattern: introducing a new tool, proposing a new process, sharing a tested and validated practice, only to watch waves of criticism follow. People pointed out what was "wrong," what "could be better," what "was different at my previous company."
The problem was not with the criticism itself. The real problem was where organizational energy was being directed into dismantling the tool rather than building the purpose behind it.
This is where our reflection begins.
The trap of criticism without cause
There is a fundamental difference between contributing meaningful improvements and wearing down an initiative with superficial criticism. In the organizations where I work, I frequently observe people who judge the tool before even opening themselves to understanding why it exists.
It is as if aesthetic perfection or functional familiarity mattered more than the actual impact of that tool. They do not. When someone invests more energy in disqualifying the form than in understanding the purpose, what truly matters gets lost.
Tools are means, never ends. What makes a tool genuinely valuable is not whether it comes in Excel, PowerPoint, or a digital form. What truly matters is whether it communicates purpose with clarity, whether it generates genuine learning, and whether it mobilizes behaviors aligned with the objective being pursued. These questions are almost never asked by those seeking only flaws.
Research on communication effectiveness in organizational change reveals something important: the primary cause of failure in implementation processes is not the tool itself, but rather the lack of clarity about purpose and ineffective communication with end users. It is not, therefore, the format of the brush, but the absence of meaning it carries.
The power of organizational legitimacy
Those who advance are not those who find the perfect tool. They are those who understand that, even with imperfections, the purpose is strong enough to sustain the cycle of continuous improvement.
Tools gain strength when they become legitimate within the company culture. What organizational management research calls intra-organizational legitimacy is that moment when people begin to see value, relevance, and alignment between what is proposed and what they believe as a collective. Without this, the tool is rejected, even if technically perfect.
The danger of copy and paste
Another factor that feeds the golden brush illusion is replicating experiences from other organizations without taking care to understand context. Tools that worked very well in one company are adopted in another as if they were universal recipes.
But security, leadership, and culture do not work by recipe. They work by thoroughly evaluated context. The golden brush, in this case, becomes a symbol of reference without roots, shining because it worked elsewhere, but here it may make no sense at all. And most dangerous of all is that by importing tools without reflection, we risk imposing a solution that demobilizes rather than engages.
Everett Rogers's Diffusion of Innovations Theory demonstrates that for a tool to be truly adopted, it must be compatible with the context, be simple to use, be testable, be visible, and offer clear benefits. When we copy without evaluating these variables, we lose all these attributes and create more resistance than transformation.
What sustains transformation
What sustains transformation is purpose, never packaging. Every tool must run its own cycle of continuous improvement. It must be adapted, tested, improved. This only happens when there is genuine commitment to the purpose and not merely to the solution's packaging.
The truth I have learned from observing hundreds of implementations is simple, yet powerful: I have seen incredible tools fail because they were poorly communicated. And I have seen simple solutions gain extraordinary strength because there was a deep connection with the purpose.
Before seeking the golden brush
Ask yourself these questions before criticizing or adopting a new tool:
- Am I spending more energy criticizing than helping to build something better?
- Am I seeking the perfect tool, or am I seeking connection with a purpose worth fighting for?
- Is this tool appropriate for my specific context, or is it merely a copy of something that shone elsewhere?
True excellence does not lie in the golden brush. It lies in deeply understanding the why of things, in genuinely respecting the context in which you operate, and in having the humility necessary to make the tool work before attempting to reinvent it.
Tools save lives and transform organizations, provided their purpose is well communicated.
Watch my documentary "A Day To Remember" which will be released on 11/18 at 06:00 PM (ET)
Would you like to learn more about my work? Purchase my books at the links below.
- Safety Leadership: http://bit.ly/44kFy2Z
- Antifragile Leadership: http://bit.ly/4ni6kBM
- 80 Ways to Expand Risk Perception: https://amzn.to/3VbWlAV
- Safety Culture: https://bit.ly/3x8IDXm
- Safety Culture Diagnosis: https://amzn.to/3XfnBkt
🧠 Follow me, Andreza Araújo , for more on EHS and leadership.
♻️ Repost this if you think it can help someone in your network!
