Some years back, as the rising cost of malpractice suits began to be felt in the medical community, researchers wondered why some doctors were sued for malpractice far more often than others. After gathering data and controlling for variables, like years of experience and types of practice, it was discovered that doctors who had better communications skills, who practiced active listening, expressed compassion and demonstrated good bedside manner were less likely to be sued.

Skip ahead 20+ years and meet the Sorry Works! Coalition. This is a group of doctors, hospitals, insurers and the like who have joined together to provide what they call a "middle-ground solution to the malpractice crisis." They advocate that medical professionals admit mistakes and apologize for them. This movement is known as "disclosure and apology," and it is gaining ground and media attention.

Certainly disclosure and apology works for those in other industries as well, such as Jet Blue Airlines CEO, David Neeleman. This past February, when travelers were kept as long as 11 hours on planes on the ground, the outpouring of anger was immediate. Despite less-than-polished TV performances and direct-to-YouTube video (which drew mostly cynical comments), he shocked Americans by doing what so few business leaders before him have done. He said, "I am sorry, and here is how we will fix it." Most major media observers and water cooler pundits gave him high marks for effort, saying the bar had been raised, and declaring this the dawn of a new era in customer relations. (Although, as we were publishing this newsletter, Neeleman stepped aside as CEO.)

How did something as elementary as an apology become the new tactical strategy for business? Very likely, it was the medical community that began to demonstrate that there was a real bottom-line advantage to the apology. For example, The Detroit News reported in 2004 that the University of Michigan Health System says it has cut its annual tab for attorney fees from $3 million to $1 million since initiating the policy in 2002.

Does this infer that lawyers and accountants have kept the words "I'm sorry" away from their CEO's lips?

Yes, it does, and for sometimes justifiable reasons. The contention that an apology is an admission of guilt does have basis in law. That is why there has been a legislative push to enact laws that make it clear that an expression of regret or compassion or an apology cannot be construed as an admission of guilt. Currently, 29 states have laws to protect those who say they are sorry, but these laws are generally specific to health care professionals.

Nonetheless, there are take-aways here for all organizations. People sue because they are angry and hurt. People sue when they suspect they have not been told the truth and that it will take a courtroom to get the facts. People sue when they feel they were treated callously. It is emotions, not facts, that lead to lawsuits because the facts may be unknown until after the trial. Even those with a justifiable claim to damages may be inclined to settle out of court if they believe they are being treated fairly and respectfully.

Humans are, by and large, very forgiving. The phrase "I'm only human" is an acknowledgment that everyone makes mistakes, everyone is fallible. But as people who believe in equality, we Americans are also adamant that everyone is equally responsible for his or her own actions and must be held accountable. Admit, apologize and amend; simple, effective and absolutely pre-elementary.

Now go tell your sister you are sorry you knocked down her blocks and that you won't do it again. And then pick them up.

A brief controversy erupted this spring when General Peter Pace, Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, made comments about his belief in the immorality of homosexuality to the Chicago Tribune. Since 1993, the Armed Forces of the United States had a policy known as "don't ask, don't tell."

General Pace, in response to many questions about his remarks, said later that, "In expressing my support for the current policy, I also offered some personal opinions about moral conduct. I should have focused more on my support of the policy and less on my personal moral views."

He did not say he was wrong, only that he lacked focus. And he did not apologize, for which he received further criticism.

Some praised Pace for his candor, but many others felt the interview reflected poorly on the man and his understanding of his obligations to his employer.

The phrase "in my personal opinion" is common and usually means:

      A.         I am about to say something I probably shouldn't.
      B.         I lack knowledge, but I want to talk, so I will give you an opinion.
      C.         I know I am saying something indiscreet, but I can't be nailed for it,
                  because I invoked the personal-opinion clause.

While A and B offer a look into the speaker's ego, C simply is not true. We are held accountable for our words. There is no "olly olly oxen free" for grown-ups.

The question, then, is this: when is your personal opinion relevant? In a personal conversation.

Problems occur when people fail to understand where a professional conversation ends and a personal one begins. People think they work among friends when they are in fact with co-workers. There is a difference. People also don't realize that when media interviewers chat and act friendly, they may be trying to get your guard down so you will say something highly quotable and maybe controversial.

And why do they want controversy and scandal? It translates into profits. The day that Anna Nicole Smith died, TV viewership skyrocketed. CNN had a million more viewers that day, and Entertainment Tonight viewership was up 15 percent for the month. As moneymaking-businesses, the media go after their customers aggressively, like anyone else in a highly competitive field.

There are times when a personal opinion is warranted. For instance, if you have a TV or radio program or a published column with your name in the title, you probably can share your personal opinion, but even then, discretion is strongly advised. Look what happened to Imus in the Morning.

Seriously, though, ask yourself, "would this person be talking to me if I were unemployed?" If the answer is no, your personal opinion is neither required nor desired.