I hate to be patronized. We all have our areas of confidence and our needs. I can analyze a set of facts and come to a logical conclusion from them. That this conclusion is rarely popular is not a refutation of my evaluation, but a measure of how much choices and decisions are driven by non-rational issues.
I am confident in my analytical (as opposed to emotional) abilities. I don't need someone to agree with me, just take me seriously. I understand when agendas are driven by emotional forces, but I really don't like it when people refuse to acknowledge their drivers in the face of rational analysis. And it is worst when what is at stake are the livs and prosperity of others.
I get really unhappy when my intellectual efforts are patronized- given lip service and then promptly ignored. Why ask for input only to ignore it? Why did I waste my time and effort on your request or needs if you are just going to pay no attnention?
Oddly, this does not affect me at all in practicing medicine. I understand the pull of physical indulgence, of lust and hunger, anxiety and despair. I am very sympathetic to those suffering from the physical problems caused by these drivers. Life is not lived logically on an individual basis; we are all driven by emotions and needs.
On a professional basis, however, I expect better of anyone, most especially myself. I should not be doing c-sections on women because I am anxious or impatient. A stock broker should not make recommendations in anger or anxiety, but through understanding.
There are simply endless examples of organizations and governments making decisions based on beliefs and desire rather than data, and making a mess. So many of mine come from military history, in part because I am familiar with it, and in part because the risk of death for hundreds of thousands has a way of magnifying the stupidity of decisions made contrary to data.
Germany's generals despised Hitler for the most part. The generals were products of formal military training which conferred not only specialized abilities but also social status. To have a corporal (Hitler's rank in WW 1) telling them how to conduct a campaign was quite offensive to most of them. Part of their training, however, was to obey their superior officer and the head of state.
The German general staff objected to plans for the 1940 campaign in France. When they resulted in a crushing victory, the staff, while abandoning none of its values, acquiesced in Hitler's meddling. They continued to raise concerns about plans for attacking Russia, and also for the battle of the Bulge. Hitler overrode them repeatedly, confident in his superior ability.
Of course, it is quite foolish to ignore the professional advice of trained professionals too often. Hitler's 'insights' resulted in devastating defeats repeatedly predicted in impressive detail by the staff. He just paid no attention, blaming the staff for their ineffective execution of his plans rather than his own errors.
This kind of interaction plays out repeatedly when professionals give advice based on their experience and training which is then ignored by administrators for monetary or personal reasons. The equivalent of 'doctor shopping' goes on in the search for consultants who will say what is wanted to be said, either at a corporate or governmental level.
The professionals who warned about a bad outcome are typically chided for disloyalty or for 'not being on board'. Commonly, they are fired or leave (many of Hitler's generals were fired or resigned, being happier at home than being ignored and mistreated). Sadly, people and organizations must suffer the consequences of their arrogance and foolishness before they will change course. This results in military defeat, federal debt, bankruptcies, mergers, and failure of longstanding, respected institutions.
Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make insane.....
Ted
I am confident in my analytical (as opposed to emotional) abilities. I don't need someone to agree with me, just take me seriously. I understand when agendas are driven by emotional forces, but I really don't like it when people refuse to acknowledge their drivers in the face of rational analysis. And it is worst when what is at stake are the livs and prosperity of others.
I get really unhappy when my intellectual efforts are patronized- given lip service and then promptly ignored. Why ask for input only to ignore it? Why did I waste my time and effort on your request or needs if you are just going to pay no attnention?
Oddly, this does not affect me at all in practicing medicine. I understand the pull of physical indulgence, of lust and hunger, anxiety and despair. I am very sympathetic to those suffering from the physical problems caused by these drivers. Life is not lived logically on an individual basis; we are all driven by emotions and needs.
On a professional basis, however, I expect better of anyone, most especially myself. I should not be doing c-sections on women because I am anxious or impatient. A stock broker should not make recommendations in anger or anxiety, but through understanding.
There are simply endless examples of organizations and governments making decisions based on beliefs and desire rather than data, and making a mess. So many of mine come from military history, in part because I am familiar with it, and in part because the risk of death for hundreds of thousands has a way of magnifying the stupidity of decisions made contrary to data.
Germany's generals despised Hitler for the most part. The generals were products of formal military training which conferred not only specialized abilities but also social status. To have a corporal (Hitler's rank in WW 1) telling them how to conduct a campaign was quite offensive to most of them. Part of their training, however, was to obey their superior officer and the head of state.
The German general staff objected to plans for the 1940 campaign in France. When they resulted in a crushing victory, the staff, while abandoning none of its values, acquiesced in Hitler's meddling. They continued to raise concerns about plans for attacking Russia, and also for the battle of the Bulge. Hitler overrode them repeatedly, confident in his superior ability.
Of course, it is quite foolish to ignore the professional advice of trained professionals too often. Hitler's 'insights' resulted in devastating defeats repeatedly predicted in impressive detail by the staff. He just paid no attention, blaming the staff for their ineffective execution of his plans rather than his own errors.
This kind of interaction plays out repeatedly when professionals give advice based on their experience and training which is then ignored by administrators for monetary or personal reasons. The equivalent of 'doctor shopping' goes on in the search for consultants who will say what is wanted to be said, either at a corporate or governmental level.
The professionals who warned about a bad outcome are typically chided for disloyalty or for 'not being on board'. Commonly, they are fired or leave (many of Hitler's generals were fired or resigned, being happier at home than being ignored and mistreated). Sadly, people and organizations must suffer the consequences of their arrogance and foolishness before they will change course. This results in military defeat, federal debt, bankruptcies, mergers, and failure of longstanding, respected institutions.
Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make insane.....
Ted
Comments
Post a Comment