What do you do when a flawed idea becomes a sacred cow (As a metaphor, an object or practice which is considered immune from criticism, especially unreasonably so), but is not acknowledged as such?

Like a paper tiger (something that seems as threatening as a tiger, but is really harmless), paper cows are not what they appear. They often start off as well intentioned, yet flawed concepts that are passively tolerated.

Over time they become so ingrained in day-to-day activities that people treat them (whether they realize it or not) as if they are beyond reproach, anointing them sacred cows.

Paper cows are quite common in business.

It usually starts innocently enough. A practice/procedure is suggested and it sounds perfectly reasonable. Over time though, cracks in the logic begin to become apparent. When criticism first emerges, the loyalists cry out, “Give it a chance. We need more time to evaluate if it’s working.” Fair enough.

Later on, when things have not still improved they will argue, “This process is necessary.” Really? When did the process become necessary? This is a clear indication of people confusing the symptom with one potential remedy. Yes, something must be done. A new process may indeed be necessary to solve a problem, but why must it be there’s? Remember, their remedy isn’t even effective.

At this point, they are simply perpetuating the illusion. Even if a flawed system is portrayed as organic and the loyalists claim they are open to both suggestion and change, the system is still inherently flawed. More often then not, this is because it fails to address underlying issues.

How does this happen? Sometimes problems emerge so drastic that something, anything must be done to stop the bleeding. The problem is that organizations become so preoccupied with their efforts to stop the aforementioned bleeding that they neglect to evaluate how effective these efforts actually are. Yes, some of the bleeding has been restrained. But were they to step back and objectively look at the situation, they’d see the whole thing is just a bloody mess.

Sometimes people are just lazy and don’t want to take the time to come up with a better idea. Other times, they think they’re already done the best they can. Paper cow loyalists often think they’re making the best of a bad situation.

Complicating things further, a paper cow can be responsible for actual improvements; just not the ones it was meant to create. How do you reconcile the value of such an idea with the fact that it isn’t solving the problem it was meant to? It’s questions like these that make paper cows so pervasive.

At what point does a flawed idea from becomes a failed institution? This is the one of the underlying questions you must account for when evaluating a potential paper cow. Perhaps, as the loyalists suggest, the idea has just not yet found its stride and needs more time to catch on. How do you know when enough is enough? When is a failure deemed a failure? It’s this realm of ambiguity that is the birthing ground for the paper cow.

Paper cows can be complicated. They can be confusing. They are often an indicator of complacency.

Pretending that something hasn’t become a sacred cow doesn’t make it so.

A bad situation can only stifle innovation if you let it. There’s always a better way to do things, you just haven’t thought of it yet.

Do not be complacent. Don’t settle.

Strive to be better. Strive to be epic.

Beware of paper cows.