Recognizing the Pattern
This pattern tends to show up when direction is unclear and decisions feel risky.
There’s work to be done, but also a sense that getting it wrong could create rework, conflict, or wasted effort. In those conditions, checking first feels safer than acting alone.
In isolation, this behavior is rarely the problem. It often reflects a desire to align, to do the right thing, and to avoid unintended consequences.
The Pattern: The Validator
“Can you look this over first?”
The Validator seeks confirmation before moving forward. This pattern emerges when priorities are ambiguous, ownership is shared, or past decisions have been reversed without warning.
It isn’t insecurity.
It’s risk management through alignment.
What This Pattern Is Optimizing For
The Validator pattern often exists because it optimizes for:
- Alignment with intent
- Avoidance of rework
- Shared understanding
- Political safety
- Consistency with expectations
These are reasonable goals — especially in complex environments.
When This Pattern Works Well
The Validator is valuable when direction is genuinely uncertain or evolving.
In early planning, cross-functional work, or high-impact decisions, slowing down to confirm intent can prevent costly divergence. This pattern helps surface assumptions and keeps teams from moving quickly in the wrong direction.
When clarity is still forming, validation protects both the work and the people doing it.
When It Starts to Cost More Than It Delivers
The cost shows up when validation becomes the default rather than the exception.
Decisions stack up waiting for approval. Leaders become bottlenecks. Momentum slows — not because work is hard, but because permission is unclear.
Over time, capable people stop acting on judgment and start optimizing for reassurance. Progress becomes hesitant, even when direction is already known.
The System Signals That Reinforce It
This pattern is often reinforced when:
- Direction changes without explanation
- Ownership and decision rights are ambiguous
- Feedback arrives late or inconsistently
- Mistakes are punished more than misalignment
- Leaders are expected to approve everything
In these conditions, seeking validation isn’t inefficiency — it’s self-preservation.
The Healthier Expression: Alignment Mode
The healthier expression of this instinct isn’t less communication — it’s clearer signals.
In Alignment Mode, intent is explicit, decision boundaries are visible, and feedback is timely. People know when they’re empowered to act and when alignment is required.
Alignment Mode reduces the need for constant validation by making expectations easier to read — without removing collaboration or care.
A Question Worth Sitting With
Where are people currently asking for validation because direction is unclear?
And what would change if intent, ownership, and decision boundaries were easier to see?
