Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


Another point raised in the article was the general concept of reactive feedback. This typically means that when things go wrong, people tend to focus on the symptoms and case specific variables that resulted in poor performance. Very rarely will people try to develop deeper into potential fundamental issues in their business model that may have caused the issue in the first place. The argument can always be made that sometimes bad things happen that is outside of reasonable prediction/control, however in the interest of continued improvement, I believe it to be important to learn from every potential source of weakness in order to prevent another occurrence in the future despite how unlikely it is. Obviously this would be highly subjective; even if the extraneous variable to be extremely rare hence why was very rare, it is still important to at least establish an environment where such variables can at least be evaluated rather than upright dismissal. This is also a problem of convenience; it is much more convenient to blame external things than to admit a flaw in our core schema. This is due tot he to the fact that if we were to start questioning our core beliefs, it would imply that all auxiliary decisions based on former core beliefs were also wrong. This method of thinking is a fallacy in itself as logic would dictate, it would be beneficial to recognize sunk costs (in the form of effort and past decision) and change one's decisions to ensure a superior future outcome where as doubling down on existing beliefs and blaming things on luck to be incredibly unprofessional decision making.