An Exchange of a Somber
Sunday
James
R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
©
November 15, 2015
Note:
There is no reference here to the slaughter that occurred in Paris, France on Friday, November 13, 2015. That said our hearts and prayers go out to all Parisians and Europeans and those who have lost loved ones.
Sir James,
For your disconfirmation.
The characteristic of the organizational dysfunction phenomenon that suggests its mechanism of action is time and circumstance-independent ubiquity.
Since man first learned how to record his experience on clay tablets to today’s media options, organizational mal-performance has been a continuous feature of our species.
The self-destructive processes by which organizations fail their own viability needs and their purpose have been on exhibit, nonstop, world-wide, since the formation of the first city in Samaria.
The various genocides in process around the world today, for one instance, are exact copies of those described in the Bible.
For millennia, organizational dysfunction has been considered a goal of Nature herself and therefore an inescapable overhead cost of maintaining a city. In effect, organizational self-destruction was elevated to the lofty status of universal constant.
Because the damage field of institutional dysfunction is seen to be growing in wreckage and carnage, significant efforts have been made to mitigate the phenomenon. Since 1940, over $200T was spent looking for a cure.
The money is gone with nothing to show for it and, for all practical purposes, the search was abandoned. Even the gurus are collecting unemployment checks.
A record so perfect and so durable through all the vicissitudes of existence suggests a cause at a very fundamental level of social decision-making.
Control theory instructs that such a record of perfection could only be laid down by a system under tight control by universal forcefields.
That means the self-declared victims of organizational dysfunction are in fact willing perpetrators of their plight. The usual suspects can be ruled-out by the passing of generations without so much as a blip on the trend chart.
Climbing this ladder of logic to its final landing, the sign there reads “The same people clamoring for effective leadership, their ‘fix,’ must be the primary agents in forming the dysfunction itself.”
Such a conclusion, i.e., self-destruction, flies in the face of the Homo sapiens claim of exceptional “intelligence.”
What could be intelligent about a species that deliberately makes choices to ruin itself and then clamors for a hero to rescue it? How absurd to think that a species brilliant enough to send an artifact to Pluto could also, just as intentionally, produce a Challenger – and then a Columbia!
The absurdity has endured for so long because there was no conceptual frame of reference for organizational non-dysfunction and certainly no lasting examples of “attainable” functionality to reverse-engineer.
The perpetrators of organizational dysfunction (us) could always come up with a plausible excuse, protecting their victimhood from connection to accomplice of the very crime that ostensibly rendered them victims. Their default excuse?
“We’re no worse than the others.” A claim totally and absolutely true and another giveaway of cause.
The fiction of victimhood of organizational dysfunction could be covered up because nothing ever appeared, even after $200T worth of assaults, to serve as the functionally attainable standard.
The fact the dilemma of self-destruction was never solved in reproducible, lasting manner, over a 5K span of time gave credence to the claim “It is Allah’s will.”
This epoch of stalemate came to an end with the development and implementation of a “fix” paradigm, the breakthrough.
The paradigm for reversing organizational dysfunction has a solid theoretical platform.
Completely connected to natural law, transparent, it is generic and universal. It is self-sustaining after installation. Benefits appear quickly, practically without cost. Foremost, the transformation is a happy scene from day one.
The most significant feature of the innovation is that application sites are operational and you are encouraged to examine any of them in situ anytime 24/7.
You can evaluate the paradigm from initialization activities to mature installations that are still gaining benefits years after the implementation program ended.
Paradigm falsification efforts on your part are strongly encouraged.
Now that the paradigm of the attainable is in hand, it is easy to measure the root cause system of organizational dysfunction. We can reverse the dysfunction on any social system in short order, while you watch.
It takes less than an hour to restore the dysfunction. You can witness the deliberate, controlled transformation either way you wish.
Having done thousands, there is no feature of the paradigm that can’t be demonstrated for your people in your own shop in less than 2 hours.
It is this capability that has exposed the smoking gun of efficient cause, catching everyone red-handed in the act of self-betrayal. Refusal to audit the paradigm that delivers such a huge benefit package originates from a morbid phobia of change infused into your childhood brain by social conditioning.
What the paradigm does is expose the paranoia of
success, Achievemephobia, daughter of change phobia, Metathesiophobia.
There is no way to hide your phobia of success from public knowledge. Your deliberate failure to follow up the breakthrough is immediately noticed and it is a phobia for which society will not give you the benefit of the doubt.
When you clamor for a fix and then refuse it when it knocks on your door, society feels you have been deliberately deceiving it. Of course you have, but “You’re no worse than the others” also remains true.
All you have to do to prove your case in that regard is expose your accusers to the same choice. You are free to do so and so are your targets.
The driving force that installed change phobia as prime directive is a combination of social conditioning and the human brain. Science has proven that socialization taught us what to think and the brain took charge of what to do about it.
The choices that we espouse about dysfunction today were really made in our formative years. We think we are making a rational choice when, in fact, we are reading the cognitive teleprompter running on obsolete software.
* * *
As usual, your analysis of the problem is true, and
yes, discomfiting. It has generated these random thoughts.
We like the clean landscape of mathematics, and the
brain as a machine renders that cleanliness gratifying.
Socialization, on the other hand, is not mathematics but confounded by spurious behavior given to the predilections of people.
Science has tried to correct this social behavior by generating statistical significance in manufacturing with Six Sigma replication.
Meanwhile, massive data collection agencies are obsessed with polling using science in an attempt to predict people's consumer preferences and voting behaviors, among other inclinations.
In point of fact, it is easier to get to Pluto than to get people to behave.
B. F. Skinner tried to turn human behavior into the consistency of his pigeons.
We are left with his legacy of program learning in education and vocational training, including the military, indeed, our celebrated higher educational institutions. These are little more than vocational training factories whatever the sophistication of the discipline.
"Man cannot live by bread alone" is the cry, but modernity insists by God we're going to see that man does.
Wealth has become the mantra with psychology and economics devolving to the level of mammon.
Why should we be surprised that the complex organization is still lock stepping to the Roman cadence of 2,000 years ago?
After all, the Roman Catholic Church bought into the Roman formula lock, stock and barrel, and Western Civilization hasn't varied from that paradigm since.
Primitive societies first modeled themselves in imitation of the animals that provided them with food, clothing, and shelter.
Nature is functional, amoral, and conscienceless with an implicit hierarchy of demands and needs. To survive, we bested Nature and its wild kingdom, and then started taking ourselves -- and our genius -- seriously.
To this day we celebrate each invention of man as evidence of our genius, and that includes the organization of our society and its phalanxes of support.
Complexity is an invention of man; simplicity is an aspect of Nature.
In a modest way, my writing is an attempt to become reacquainted with our primitive self, the self that first became aware of itself, and then adapted itself to this strange environment called "the planet, earth."
My research has not been grand, but empirical, personal, unobtrusive and obtrusive. In my world, feelings often have the consistency of facts.
Speaking candidly, I have never been comfortable in any organization and yet I have had no trouble putting each organization with which I have been associated under the lens of my microscope and studying it as I suspect a sport's analyst calibrates the behavior in a sporting contest.
Organizations are designed for people to behave like laboratory rats. In fact, society is so organized as well. Is it any wonder that in such confinement that people often misbehave as if unglued, or that organizations are fundamentally, in mass, dysfunctional?
You taught me the best control is no control. It works in Nature because it is not driven by fear but demand and need, by instinct, which is equivalent to our intuition.
Nature and its minions seek their own center and their own balance. We are forever pushing, driven by that artificial construct "progress," never comfortable living in the present, always needing to be useful, engaged, on the go, growing, when in fact we are always dying a little bit each day.
Nature is being moved out of our consciousness. We know what happens when a sense of being trapped generates. Imagine nature when it is not allowed to nature.
Alas, soon there will be no place for elephants and so elephants will be literally as well as figuratively in the room.
Many years ago, I read The Gospel of Judas, a book written more than a hundred years after the death of the defamed apostle, and now I'm reading it again. Judas sounds a lot like Senator Ron Paul, intelligent, sensible, perceptive, but marginalized.
Judas wrote that martyrdom was insane. Early Church Fathers celebrated martyrdom as it is celebrated today by jihadists.
Republican Candidates for the Presidency would "kill" ISIS. Two thousand years ago, that was the Roman strategy against a small, peasant driven illiterate Jewish splinter group without a name, only to have it become Christianity and the largest religious denomination on the planet.
What is the answer to all this discordant noise? Love is the answer.
You cannot kill that which you fear. Nor can you expect people to behave like lab rats.
People respond to love, not hate. Problems are solved in this love/hate continuum when there is ownership. Outsiders can never own what does not belong to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment