> For example, an Application Manager in the NM process will tend to err > for asking a question more, that DAM will have to read. > > I haven't yet seen easy ways of introducing a feedback mechanism to > counter this: saying "you didn't need to do this" feels to me like > arbitrarily undervaluing someone's work, and maybe the person really > found it important to do it. > > I would be very much interested in reasoning about this. Maybe instead of saying "you shouldn't have done that", rather explain which parts of questions asked in one specific process one found sufficient to approve the NM as a DAM and why, so there is some more orientation and more insight, what exactly DAM finds important to ask. On the other hand given that quite some people find their process a valuable experience, it would be sad to reduce it to the bare minimum, as long an AM takes the effort to ensure, that the NM is not forced to do unnecessary things they rather wouldn't want to do. (if some stuff is more clearly optional, it might also easier for DAM to skip it)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.