Installed during a crisis with a stated review date, a fix gains the weight of inertia, so at the review undoing it looks costlier than keeping it, which its sponsors count on.
Borderline: whether this move is justified depends on the situation, and only the person in it can judge.
An example
When a pilot shortage hit a regional airline, the head of the operations center proposed suspending seniority-based schedule bidding for six months so trips could be assigned centrally. She had wanted central assignment for years and said so in the proposal, which carried an expiry date and a review by the crew planning committee in month six. The committee agreed. Over the six months the central tool routed every trip, on-time departures improved by four points, and two new planners were trained on it. At the review she presented the numbers and the cost of restoring the old bid, which by then included retraining and a schedule rebuild in the busiest season. The committee extended the suspension for a year and asked crew planning to design a hybrid that kept some bidding rights.
Why it works
Calling the change temporary makes installing it look easier: opposition stands down and scrutiny is lighter, because it is only for now. Once the measure is in place, removing it looks costlier. Someone has to spend political capital to reopen the file, undo a process that is now load bearing, and imply that the people who installed it chose wrongly. It depends on a real crisis, a review that weighs the cost of reversal, and a measure that quickly becomes something workflows depend on.
The thinking behind it
Richard H. Thaler Thaler and Sunstein's Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (2008) shows that defaults decide much of what people end up with, because most do nothing. Whether a suspension expires unless renewed or continues unless ended decides much of the outcome. The clean form sets a review date, which keeps the decision live, and the defense goes further by making expiry the default, so continuing requires a choice.
William Samuelson Samuelson and Zeckhauser's Status Quo Bias in Decision Making (1988) found that people disproportionately keep the option framed as the current state, partly because of transition costs, though a later replication backed only three of the four scenarios it retested. By month six, central assignment is the status quo, with trained planners and better on-time numbers, and restoring the bid carries real transition costs. The sponsor's case at review rests on that advantage, which is fair as long as the review happens.
When it fits
Temporary installation suits a sponsor with a real crisis to address, a fix that also serves a longer-term aim, and a measure likely to prove itself in operation. You need standing to propose the fix, a review date written into it, and data that will be ready when the review comes.
How to use it well
Propose the fix for the crisis it addresses and state your longer-term view in the same document. Then let the measure run and gather evidence, because at the review the operating record and the cost of reversal will argue for you more than any memo.
- Write the review date and the reviewing body into the approval.
- Measure the effects from day one, including the ones that cut against you.
- At the review, present the results and an honest estimate of what reversal would cost.
- Offer a compromise that keeps what works, which makes an extension easy to grant.
What it costs and where it backfires
Opponents who agreed to a temporary measure may feel maneuvered when it outlasts the crisis, and they will be warier of your next emergency proposal. If the fix produces visible problems, the review will be short. The line is the review itself: letting the date pass without the promised review, or calling the measure temporary when you never intended a real review, misleads the people who agreed to it.
When it is used on you
Calendar the review on the day the measure is approved, and assign someone to run it. Better, write the rule so the measure expires unless someone decides to continue it, which flips the inertia. Keep the original approval and its reasons, since the review will need them.