Coordinate and act
"Assume good faith" and "be bold."
Two paired norms: read colleagues as well-intentioned, and act without waiting for permission, because most mistakes are cheap to fix.
Borrowed from Wikipedia's editing guidelines, where "be bold" and "assume good faith" are two of the founding norms. Read the original source.
Ongoing habit · Minutes to start · Anyone on the team can start it
Try this first
Agree two sentences. We assume each other's intentions are good. You don't need permission to improve something, just be ready to fix it.
Use it when
Gatekeeping is slowing action and trust is low.
Skip it when
Match boldness to reversibility. It fits changes you can undo and fails on irreversible, high-stakes, or safety-critical actions, which still need checks. Good faith is a default, not a reason to ignore bad behavior.
How to introduce it
Set two norms together. Assume good faith: read a colleague's action as well-intentioned unless you have reason not to. Be bold: improve things without waiting for permission, knowing a mistake can be undone. They only work as a pair. Boldness is safe when people credit each other's intentions.
How to show up
Model both. Extend good faith visibly when someone errs, and back the people who act without asking. When you correct someone, correct them in a way that leaves the good-faith default standing.
How long it takes
A few minutes to establish. The culture shift takes longer.
What makes it hard
In low-trust teams people read mistakes as malice, and rebuilding the default takes visible restraint every time someone errs. Watch for boldness creeping into actions nobody can reverse.
What it looks like when it's working
People improve things without a permission bottleneck, mistakes get fixed without blame, and colleagues extend each other the benefit of the doubt. Sign-off queues and suspicion mean neither norm took.
How long until it sticks
Expect weeks of consistent good-faith responses to mistakes before people trust the default enough to act boldly.
How you know it stuck
People improve things without asking and extend good faith without reminders.
The idea behind it
Most people mean well and most mistakes are cheap. Waiting for permission and suspecting each other costs a team more than the occasional error.
Where it comes from
Open-source collaboration. Default-trust norms that let people act without gatekeeping, paired with easy correction. Foundational Wikipedia norms: presume contributors mean well, and edit boldly rather than waiting for permission.
Also fits: The people who know something don't say it
Home problem: Everything escalates to the top