The Standards Paradox

"This isn't up to our standards."

We've all heard it.

We've all felt that sinking feeling.

And if you've ever been brave enough to ask, "Okay, what exactly are our standards?"... you've probably encountered the awkward silence that follows.

Here's the uncomfortable truth:

Standards in most organizations live in people's heads, shifting like shadows depending on who you ask and when you ask them.

It's not just frustrating. It's a massive hidden tax on growth and efficiency.

Think about the last time someone's work "wasn't up to standards."

Was the problem really the work?

Or was it that no one had clearly defined what "good" looks like?

In most cases, we're not dealing with a performance issue. We're dealing with a clarity gap.

The paradox reveals itself:

Organizations that talk most about "having standards" often have the least clarity about what those standards actually are.

The phrase becomes a weapon instead of a guideline.
A judgment instead of a measuring stick.
A way to say "I know it when I see it" without ever defining "it."

When standards are crystal clear, you don't need to invoke them.

The work either meets them or it doesn't. Simple. Observable. Fixable.

But when standards live only in heads, every evaluation becomes political. Every piece of feedback becomes personal. Every miss becomes a referendum on competence rather than a calibration opportunity.

The next time you're tempted to say "it's not up to our standards," pause.

Ask instead: "Can I point to exactly what standard this doesn't meet?"

If you can't, the problem isn't the work.

It's the standard itself.