A few days ago, an HR manager shared a situation with me that had pushed him to his limits. It involved a highly enthusiastic employee who was always eager to say «yes» to any task she was assigned. However, there was a problem: when it came down to execution, the results she delivered were nothing like what was expected.

Despite her enthusiasm, it seemed that the instructions were either not followed or, even worse, that she did what she thought was right, ignoring what had actually been asked. After several attempts to clarify expectations and work with her, the manager was at a loss as to how to redirect the situation.
💬 A common dilemma: What do you do when someone is willing but fails to align with the expected outcomes of their tasks?
Here are two practical tools to effectively address such situations:
 
💡 1. The «cheap error» approach
This technique involves pairing the assignment of a task with an agreed-upon checkpoint with the employee. Typically, these checkpoints are scheduled when 80% of the task is complete to validate the final delivery or around 50% to ensure proper time management. However, in cases where an employee seems unfocused, the key is to set this checkpoint much earlier—when only 20% or 25% of the task has been completed.
By doing this, you can:
✅ Identify potential deviations before it’s too late.
✅ Reaffirm the correct steps.
✅ Offer support and address questions.
✅ Adjust direction without wasting significant time or resources.
The «cheap error» turns initial misunderstandings into quick, low-cost learning opportunities.
 
💡 2. Inference questions
This second tool focuses on fostering active understanding by asking specific questions that encourage the employee to reflect and connect with the task’s objectives.
Instead of asking, «Do you understand the task?» or «Do you have any questions?» try using questions like:
«How are you planning to approach this task?»
«What will be the first steps needed to achieve the goal?»
«What result do you expect to deliver at the end of the task?»
These questions encourage the employee to articulate how they understand the task and allow the manager to identify gaps or misinterpretations from the start. This way, you can correct the course before too much progress is made.
 
🛠️ The power of combining both tools
The «cheap error» provides a structured checkpoint to detect early deviations.
Inference questions, on the other hand, ensure a deeper initial understanding by encouraging the employee to think aloud about the task.
By combining these two techniques, you not only reduce errors but also foster a culture of continuous learning and effective communication.
 
👥 Your turn: How do you handle situations like this? Have you tried the «cheap error» approach or inference questions? Share your experience in the comments! 👇✨nectar?

Agradecimientos: Luma y Dall-E