When I enrolled in a British University three years ago, I was amazed to find that the British teach a course in "Judgment Making Skills". I greeted the information with a mixed reaction. On one hand, as I travel about from one workplace to another, I have noticed that "good judgment" is sorely lacking in many business decisions. On the other hand, I have also noticed that people often get into trouble making judgments about one another.

Those of the Christian faith often warn that the good book cautions us to "judge not, lest ye shall be judged", which might imply that it is detrimental to make judgments about others. Unfortunately, in some instances, if we suspend judgment, we find ourselves a victim of another's trickery or deceit. At times, failing to make targeted and correct judgments causes us to make decisions that hurt others or lead us to incur heavy losses.

In essence, what we are discussing here is the difference between the use of morale condemnation and applying intelligence while assessing people and situations. Indeed it is possible to disagree with the views and actions of another without condemning the individual for possessing and using the values and behaviors being demonstrated.

After studying the topic of "judgment" from both theoretical and theological perspectives, and combining that information with my own life experiences and observations, I have come up with some guidelines to help others make sense of these "mixed messages" we are given about matters requiring judgment.

• Judge the behavior and not the person exhibiting the behavior. Let's use the example of determining whether or not someone is attempting to deceive you, There is a subtle difference between saying, "I don't believe what you are telling me", and stating, "You are a liar". The first states that, "in this particular instance I am unconvinced that what you are saying is useful information for me". The second assumes a basic character flaw that mars future trust in the individual. One might argue that in fact a person who has told one falsehood to you is likely to tell another. I would suggest this is true mainly in circumstances where the first lie went undetected.
  
• Judgment requires flexibility and must be tailored to the situation at hand. Although we like to think that what has worked for us in the past will work for us in the future, reality indicates that in times of rapid change we are often required to revise our views to meet new demands placed upon us. For example, you may have been taught early in your life that people of different races have little in common and need to remain separate to avoid conflict. The judgments rooted in that thinking may have served Americans well in the 1940's and 1950's when we lived and worked in a segregated society, but it lacks applicability in today's multicultural environment. In order to be functional, judgment must be current and relevant to present circumstances and conditions.
  
• Judgment needs to be applied in a matter that is unselfish and considers the circumstances and needs of others. Most of the poor judgment I have noticed being applied in American workplaces stems from a myopic or selfish viewpoint. In other words, people look only at the benefits that they themselves might derive from a decision with little regard for the impact others will incur. Rules are set that make life easier for one population and more difficult for another group. If the needs of others are balanced with one's own needs, the win-win outcome that results will be credited to the "good judgment" used by decision-makers in the situation.
  
• Judgment needs to be based upon investigation, not impression. Lately, we have heard a lot about "a rush to judgment" in several court cases attracting media attention. This concept implies that we often err when we rely on initial reactions to a circumstance or individual to make a decision instead of waiting until all the facts are presented. Although an initial "gut reaction" can be quite useful in bring our attention and focus to certain aspects of a situation, it is wise to temper such reactions with evaluation of additional incoming data.
  
• Finally, charitable judgment, although risky, is universally useful. Charitable judgment is something that most of us want others to extend to us, yet we often find it difficult to extend such generosity to others. We could define "charitable judgment" as "the ability to consider and accept the mitigating causes that underlie behavior". Perhaps we hesitate to extend understanding to others because we fear being fooled. Although this is a legitimate concern, it is helpful to remember that we can be equally fooled when we judge the actions of others too harshly as well. Perhaps the good book really tries to caution us to extent to others the same charity and benevolence that we feel is due us.