10 minutes
Reasons that hold up Six tests you can run on the reasoning behind a decision in about ten minutes, and five sentences that sound like reasons but are usually something else wearing a reason’s clothes.
What you’ll be able to do Apply six tests to the reasoning behind a real decision, and sort the stated reasons into obligations, defensible preferences and habits that still need a reason. Compare the responses to this question and explain your choice: Which reading of this survives testing? Document a next step for Reasons that hold up: Take the last decision your unit made that affected people outside it. Write down the reason exactly as it was given, then run the publicity test and the rule test over that sentence. Test the reason, not the outcome Two people can reach the same decision for completely different reasons, and it is the reasons that decide the next hundred cases. This is why testing the reasoning matters more than arguing about the outcome. An outcome settles today. A reason quietly becomes a rule.
The six tests below are not a formula that produces an answer. They are a way of finding out whether the reason you are about to write down will survive contact with the person it affects, with the next case that looks like this one, and with somebody reading the file later who was not in the room. Most of them take a minute.
Two do most of the work. The publicity test — can you say the real reason, in plain words, to the person it lands on — catches reasoning that only holds together in internal shorthand. The burden test — who pays, and in what currency — catches the decision that looks cost-free from inside the division because the cost lands somewhere the division does not have to look.
Six tests, about ten minutes Publicity. Say the real reason to the person it affects, in words they use. Would it still sound like a reason?
The rule. State what you are deciding for every case that looks like this one, then check whether you would put your name to it.
Burden. Name who pays for each option in money, time, travel, waiting, paperwork, uncertainty and dignity.
Power. Ask whether the decision would be the same if the people affected had more staff, better representation, or a shorter route to someone with authority.
Evidence. Separate what you know from what you assume, and check whether an absence of complaints is evidence of anything here.
Reversal. Put yourself on the other side of the decision with the same information available, and name what you would need in order to accept it.
Five sentences that sound like reasons “The rule requires it” Sometimes true. Find the rule and read the sentence. A large share of what feels mandatory turns out to be a form design, a local practice or a cautious reading nobody has revisited. And if it is genuinely required and the requirement is causing harm, that is not the end of the conversation either. It is the beginning of a different one, with the office that owns the requirement.
“Nobody has complained” People who depend on a service have strong reasons not to complain about it, and the people a barrier stops are often the least able to work a complaint process. Silence measures the route, not the harm. If you want to know, ask in a way that costs the person nothing to answer.
“We do not have the resources” Usually true, and incomplete. Finish the sentence: so this group waits longer, or this county gets the slower answer, or this step moves onto a family. Written out, it becomes a decision somebody can own and revisit. Left unfinished, it becomes a permanent state with no author.
“It would set a precedent” A real consideration and a frequent cover. Ask what precedent, for whom, and whether it would actually be a bad one. Often the feared precedent is “we would have to do this for everybody,” which is sometimes exactly the right answer and is at minimum an honest statement of the cost.
“That sits with somebody else” Boundaries are real, and this sentence ends more conversations than it should. The usable version names who does own it, says what you will do inside your own step, and hands the rest over with the specifics attached. The unusable version leaves the person to go and find the right door on their own.
Obligation, defensible preference, or habit? A person receiving services has the right to take part in decisions about their own services.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Requests are reviewed in the order they arrive, so that nobody can move ahead of the queue.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Applications have to come in on the form, because that is how it has always been done here.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason When the state asks a person for private information about themselves, it has to say why, how it will be used and who else may see it.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Meeting materials go out two working days ahead, so people have time to read them.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Plans are returned when they are hard to read, without an example of an accepted one.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Restrictive interventions are limited to the narrow circumstances set out in rule.
Choose a category An obligation A preference we can defend A habit that still needs a reason Check matches Reset Write the reason you would give the person What you can change You control which reason goes into the record: the one that will satisfy a reviewer, or the one you would actually give the person affected.
What to watch for Do not record “does not meet requirements” when the real reason is that the requirement asks for something the person cannot produce. The second sentence is the only one that lets anybody fix it.
Your next step In the next decision you document, write the reason in the words you would use if the person were sitting across the table, and then check whether it still holds.
A private reflection, for you alone. Does this decision make sense to somebody who does not already know how the division works? If harm or exclusion came out of it, what would accountability and repair require of me? Nothing you write here is collected, seen or kept.
Carry this forward Publicity: say the real reason out loud to the person it lands on, in plain words. If it only holds together in internal shorthand, it is not a reason yet.
The rule: you are never deciding one case. Whatever you decide here is the rule for every case that looks like it. State that rule aloud and see whether you would sign it.
Burden: name who carries the cost of each option — in money, and also in time, travel, waiting, paperwork, uncertainty, risk and dignity.
Power: ask whether the decision would be the same if the people affected had more staff, better representation, or an easier route to someone with authority.
Evidence: “nobody has complained” describes how complaining works. It is not evidence that nothing is wrong, least of all where complaining puts a service at risk.
Reversal: if this were decided about you, on this evidence, by people who had never met you, what would you need in order to accept it?
A scenario about two counties held to the same review standard with unequal capacity, sorting practice separating obligations from preferences and habits, and a knowledge check on what an absence of complaints actually tells you.
Take the last decision your unit made that affected people outside it. Write down the reason exactly as it was given, then run the publicity test and the rule test over that sentence.
Browse and download only. Course notes are not typed or saved on this page.
Reset this lesson
Previous lesson Next lesson Participation and course completion in this program do not count toward DHS-required training credits unless management, a director, or DHS leadership expressly approves an exception.
