Human Behavior

“Managing by the Numbers”

by

A recent article in Business Week is titled “Managing by the Numbers” and it focuses on IBM’s attempt to build a system to assign staff to appropriate engagements around the world. Rather than relying on manual processes, a central planning group is gathering capabilities for each of their employees and attempting to let the computer match skills to opportunities.

I have a lot of experience in consulting at a number of different organizations. If you are interested in the challenges (and opportunities) of running or being part of a professional services organization, I suggest that you read “Managing the Professional Services Firm” by David Maister.

The types of examples given in the book are staffing a web services engagement in the Philippines; there is an expensive (high ranking) consultant on the bench (meaning – unassigned and not currently earning income for the firm) in a faraway country vs. a less skilled (and cheaper) local consultant who could also be assigned to the job – which to choose? This is the type of “problem” that the program is supposed to solve. The implied conceit is that consultants are interchangeable, and you can just build a team out of individual skill sets, have them show up at the work site, and pull off the engagement.

When I worked at one of the large consulting firms, in order to save space, they went to a “hoteling” concept. Since consultants were usually on the road and not in the office, some bean counter figured that it would be cheaper to not give anyone a permanent office and just have them occupy whatever space was available on the occasion that they had to work in town. The company did attempt to link your phone to your location and sometimes even had a nameplate ready for you, along with a little cart for your office supplies, so you were able to get started working with a minimum of effort. The company only had to have office space for the people likely to show up, which was maybe 25% of the total staff on a given day, saving them in rent money.

Read more

The Bailout and Human Nature

by

Eyes and ears are poor witnesses when the soul is barbarous.      Heraclitus  

Posted mid-Sunday, as bail-out talks continue.    

Pinker complains in The Blank Slate  of the increasing emphasis in the 20th century on  nurture.   This may well have increased  our sympathies for others, but has led us to undervalue human nature and therefore not consider moral hazards that tempt it.    Our experiences are so variable and their impact so ambiguous, we may be quick to assert  effect where none  existed – or emphasize it when  convenient.       Indirectly, we came  to  devalue  that third and most personally consequential component – human agency.     We say, “Officer Krupke, I’m down on my knees” and  grin, but  we  aren’t always  ironic.   Our experience and history, however,  should make  us more optimistic and  also wary:   men can be good (and remarkably so) and men are fallible.   (Sinners some might say, while the Deists find us  prone to errata.)    A culture’s use is in restraining  us from being our worst and encouraging our best; the more those restraints and rewards are internalized  the smoother, more productive, and happier  our lives. Our goal is not too  many laws but good ones, not  many restraints but necessary ones.  

The general consensus is that  increased subprime lending encouraged by Congress led CEOs to make bad loans.   We are selfish, our vision narrowed to our time and our profit:   the home buyers may have been naïve but also wanted a free lunch; the CEOs wanted to please Congress the source of their jobs, power & money; Congress wanted to buy votes, increase campaign contributions, and purchase  their own houses cheaply.    Those least likely to feel the consequences of their follies are in Congress.

Which is a long way around to the point:   What the hell were Dodd and Frank doing writing a version of the bailout?   Why do they think they should?   Why does anyone else listen to them?   Isn’t having a dog in that fight exactly the reason for recusals?   Is there no moment when we say your history has undermined your authority?      

Read more

That Isn’t a Crime

by

My charity self defense course is a few months shy of being 18 years old. It has certainly taught me a great deal about the dark side of human nature.

When I say “the dark side of human nature”, I don’t mean that seeing the scars and hearing the stories of what my students endured opened my eyes to the cruelty and violence of which criminals are capable. My brief career in law enforcement was certainly adequate to do that! Instead it showed me just how people are willing to take advantage of my good nature in order to screw over an innocent human being.

I noticed after the first year or so that a few of the people who sought me out for help, some of whom claimed extreme abuse, weren’t acting the way the rest of my students would when discussing their experiences. They would exhibit some of the classic signs of telling a lie, they wouldn’t show any lingering physical signs even though they would claim serious injury, and their emotional reactions while relating their stories would be inappropriate.

Read more

Marriage and Models

by

 “Mrs. Palin’s marriage actually makes her a terrific role model.   One of the best choices a woman can make if she wants a career and a family is to pick a partner who will be able to take on equal or primary responsibility for child-rearing.”     Cathy Young

 Re.:   Thanks to Jay Manifold’s argument below and link to Young.   Heinlein’s women seemed to me (and I wasn’t a fan and read them long, long ago) a bit  how a man imagined a strong woman to be.   He is no Michelangelo but both  capture energy.   David’s beauty is power & grace,  the swirling power of  God awesome.   Of course, his women, too, are muscular.    But, then,  I’ll take Manifold (and Heinlein’s) model   I’d like to be  someone who pulls her weight.   Most women would.

The attraction of Democratic largesse for a woman who wants the government as mate is countered by self-reliance (and family-reliance) when a woman takes a  fallible  & loving, flesh  & blood partner.   Governor Palin  values her husband,  which  is not submissive but mature.   Franklin’s belief that “God helps them that helps themselves” is seldom more true than in marriage.    This understanding  eliminates the synthetic and sentimental drama of the Lifetime channel, “women’s issue” politics, and daily bitching sessions that  resemble spinning car wheels deep in mud.  But that  understanding, that engagement   not consciousness raising liberates.

Read more

Quoted Without Comment

by

From Goleman’s Social Intelligence, pp 120-121:

Unhealthy narcissists typically lack a feeling of self-worth; the result is an inner shakiness that in a leader, for example, means that even as he unfurls inspiring visions, he harbors a vulnerability that closes his ears to criticism. Such leaders avoid even constructive feedback, which they perceive as an attack. Their hypersensitivity to criticism in any form means that narcissistic leaders don’t seek out information widely; rather, they selectively seize on data that supports their views, ignoring disconfirming facts. They don’t listen but prefer to preach and indoctrinate.

An entire organization can be narcissistic. When a critical mass of employees share a narcissistic outlook, the outfit itself takes on those traits, which become standard operating procedures.

Organizational narcissism has clear perils. Pumping up grandiosity, whether it is the boss’s or some false collective self-image held throughout the company, becomes the operating norm. Healthy dissent dies out. And any organization that is cheated of a full grasp of truth loses the ability to respond nimbly to harsh realities.