It seems there are always exceptions to the rule – often many.

The rule in book publishing: If you have one success, repeat it until it is no longer profitable to do so! Your audience expects a certain style and expertise from you, and will generally be disappointed if their expectations aren’t met. And sequels often succeed (at least financially) if the first effort was well-received, so authors have substantial motivation to continue in the same vein.

The co-author of Just Asked Leadership, Eric Vrooman, and I have been looking for an interesting topic for our next leadership book. We could go deeper into the “how to” of Just Ask Leadership; we pretty much have all the content developed from the training program we created. But if you follow in the footsteps of others, it doesn’t really feel like your path.

We’re not only thinking about being exceptions to the rule, we’re thinking about writing on that very subject. What are notable exceptions to the rule? And, more specifically, when is it a good idea to break from convention?

I watched a TV drama recently where a genetic specialist, who was charged with helping people get pregnant, raised her daughter to be pro-life. When her fifteen-year-old daughter gets pregnant, however, she pleads with her to get an abortion. Abortion is, of course, a polarizing subject—too big and weighty to reduce to a single case—but clearly there was an exception here to the genetic specialist’s rule: every life is sacred and must be protected at all costs.

The other day, my daughter was writing a paper for school regarding her feelings about WWII. She began the paper by explaining her rule: War is bad. Then came the exception: When a psychopath takes control of a country and attempts to take control of the world forcibly, war is necessary. My other daughter has a teacher who gives a backpack full of homework on a daily basis and expects it to be done on time. Does this rule apply to her, the teacher, when it comes time to meeting her own grading deadlines? Regrettably, no.

Rick Diamond (CEO Breathe Laser) and I had rules about expenses for our employees at ACI, and we had exceptions to the rule for the owners: not a very good idea, we learned.

What are the consequences to violating rules—conventional ones and the ones you set for yourself or loved ones? When do exceptions reveal problems with the rule and when do they reveal problems with the rule’s followers or enforcers? And what exactly is at stake? Respect, certainly. But does the pregnant daughter respect her mother less (for violating her own teachings) or more (for demonstrating her love and concern for her daughter)?

To what degree are rules the product of values and beliefs?

What is the point of having rules if exceptions are bound to come up?

What rules do you follow, what exceptions do you make, and how do you justify them?

We’re still feeling out if this subject is book-worthy, and would love to hear your thoughts and stories.

It seems there are always exceptions to the rule – often many.

The rule in book publishing: If you have one success, repeat it until it is no longer profitable to do so! Your audience expects a certain style and expertise from you, and will generally be disappointed if their expectations aren’t met. And sequels often succeed (at least financially) if the first effort was well-received, so authors have substantial motivation to continue in the same vein.

The co-author of Just Asked Leadership, Eric Vrooman, and I have been looking for an interesting topic for our next leadership book. We could go deeper into the “how to” of Just Ask Leadership; we pretty much have all the content developed from the training program we created. But if you follow in the footsteps of others, it doesn’t really feel like your path.

We’re not only thinking about being exceptions to the rule, we’re thinking about writing on that very subject. What are notable exceptions to the rule? And, more specifically, when is it a good idea to break from convention?

I watched a TV drama recently where a genetic specialist, who was charged with helping people get pregnant, raised her daughter to be pro-life. When her fifteen-year-old daughter gets pregnant, however, she pleads with her to get an abortion. Abortion is, of course, a polarizing subject—too big and weighty to reduce to a single case—but clearly there was an exception here to the genetic specialist’s rule: every life is sacred and must be protected at all costs.

The other day, my daughter was writing a paper for school regarding her feelings about WWII. She began the paper by explaining her rule: War is bad. Then came the exception: When a psychopath takes control of a country and attempts to take control of the world forcibly, war is necessary. My other daughter has a teacher who gives a backpack full of homework on a daily basis and expects it to be done on time. Does this rule apply to her, the teacher, when it comes time to meeting her own grading deadlines? Regrettably, no.

Rick Diamond (CEO Breathe Laser) and I had rules about expenses for our employees at ACI, and we had exceptions to the rule for the owners: not a very good idea, we learned.

What are the consequences to violating rules—conventional ones and the ones you set for yourself or loved ones? When do exceptions reveal problems with the rule and when do they reveal problems with the rule’s followers or enforcers? And what exactly is at stake? Respect, certainly. But does the pregnant daughter respect her mother less (for violating her own teachings) or more (for demonstrating her love and concern for her daughter)?

To what degree are rules the product of values and beliefs?

What is the point of having rules if exceptions are bound to come up?

What rules do you follow, what exceptions do you make, and how do you justify them?

We’re still feeling out if this subject is book-worthy, and would love to hear your thoughts and stories.