ALR — Anti-Learning Regime

I can give honest feedback to leadership without concern for negative consequences

Bad news travels upward in this organisation as quickly as good news

Formal reporting accurately reflects ground-level reality

People here are rewarded for identifying problems early, not punished

Leadership actively seeks out dissenting views before making major decisions

I feel safe sharing uncomfortable information without softening or withholding it

Formal channels for feedback are trusted and used

What gets said in formal settings closely matches what gets said informally

When mistakes happen, the focus is on understanding causes rather than assigning blame

People who report errors are treated as contributors to institutional learning

Post-incident reviews produce changes in practice, not just changes in personnel

Admitting uncertainty is treated as a sign of intellectual honesty, not weakness

The institution distinguishes clearly between honest errors and negligence

People here surface problems openly because they trust they will not be punished for doing so

Failed experiments are valued for what they teach, not just for what they cost

Leaders model vulnerability by publicly acknowledging their own mistakes

People who disagree with leadership are treated with respect

Constructive criticism of institutional strategy is welcomed

Decision-making processes explicitly include structured opportunities for dissent

Minority views are documented and revisited when circumstances change

The institution has changed direction based on internal challenge at least once in the past three years

I feel able to express views I believe are correct, even when they are unpopular

People who challenge productively are valued and advanced here as much as those who align

The quality of debate in this institution has improved over the past two years

Critical institutional knowledge is documented and accessible, not held in individuals' heads

When key people leave, their knowledge is systematically transferred

Lessons from past projects are consulted before similar projects begin

The institution maintains a usable record of why past decisions were made

Knowledge management is resourced and maintained, not treated as a side activity

Lessons from past mistakes are retained and visibly influence how we operate

New staff can access the institutional history they need to make informed decisions

Institutional capability is distributed widely enough to withstand the simultaneous departure of key individuals