Control through guilt Bashny.Net

Many years ago I was appointed responsible for fire safety within the office of the IT company. It looked like this: "Sign here and here all your name on the flap will hang, nothing else". The problem was that I found that really mean this painting. And began to "build" all at the office in compliance with safety regulations. If you have not tried it, misleading — often very difficult to do under normal conditions. What's the problem? That the majority of people considers this provision of the Convention. All break, and we will.

Now imagine that you enter a rule impossible to follow. Or who will not follow, because I'm used to doing otherwise. And do not provide tight control over each case. Well, sort of forum, where to curse the rules it is impossible, but the moderator do not care. The examples are a bit larger not far to seek, but do not talk about this today. Presented?

I know that we just made inside your company or Department? We have created a situation in which blame every person individually, but no one in the whole. And this is a very important and brutal tool of control.

Why do that?

For example, if you as a Manager might want to fire someone, you always have any official reason: not systematically comply with the chief. However, even after dismissal of such a character no one in the team will not execute the rule. There is the principle of social proof: "no One does, and I will not do. What stand for?". Accordingly, to maintain the status quo: you have everyone in the group to blame so that can be instantly dismissed, but all in all doing all right.

What does it mean? You moved the control from the sphere documented processes within the scope of individual agreements with each. You have simplified the chain of official interaction, in fact, made himself tyrant in a single command. Now imagine that you are wrong somewhere. Your colleagues will be afraid to point it out – because instant response is the opening of their guilt (which is the default). That is, everyone goes to blame and hopes that you will not fall from grace.

What is happening in the team at that time? For starters – there is a social force that keeps new people from being changed. Protective reaction of the system, roughly speaking. As in my example with fire safety – it is unlikely that I alone can change the work of 20 people without the direct support of the Director of the company, but in theory, in a perfect model – I had to do just that.

There is a growing level of fear. If you always blame it on the new unfair requirements will be to react passively. You and so guilty. Hence – reducing feedback, which, by and large, the changing market for deadly.

Further breaks down the concept on the feasibility of following other rules and documents. One can break – so, and the rest too. This is straight beats first by discipline and then by diligence. Countermeasure appears very quickly – the head-the tyrant must clearly and strictly to denote the orders. This leads to a further rasshatyvanii processes only the mechanics "have done-have done", that only works in small groups (but for their tyranny effective).

Total, we have three stages of injustice:

Full-time work, when all work on the documents and rules. It is expensive in terms of energy consumption for the observance of all that is not definitely vital now.

Joint when the guilty one, but he does not receive social confirmation of his innocence.

A mess, when all are guilty.

In this situation we come to the mess. Chaos is the most complex condition. When all the blame, you can't fire everyone all at once, and then find new people.

How to solve?

To disassemble the mess is very unpleasant and difficult. This is one of the managerial tasks that I once did. Not to say that well, but he did. So, imagine that you are faced with a similar choice, and you have several options:

To recruit a new team. Everything is simple: you select up to 10% of sane people from their current team and translate them into the new, then gradually provide transfer functions. That's a great plan if you have unlimited resources. In reality they are not.

Slowly pull the system to order through the introduction of new rules and constant monitoring (I did so). The normal plan, which will meet serious resistance: roughly speaking, the lazy employees will undermine the discipline and create friction. Will start a situation of the type "Oh, just to follow the rules exactly impossible, we are all human beings". The military in this case, go to the barracks and resolutely "build".

To use the factor of social proof and use the power of control through guilt against the very system of such control. This is a very elegant method. For this you need one operation to get everyone out from under the guilt, programmirovat them that past sins will not be counted. But this is not just Amnesty – because without specific negative example would not be motivated again to do as before. The mechanics are very cynical, but effective. Need to find a culprit and to explain what is wrong in this situation it was he. No matter what his contribution to the state of things after the fact. And to punish. This example is wartime, when the retreat of the detachment relies shot, but to deprive yourself of the fighters is impossible. The commander finds a "traitor" — and refers to his guilt. If this is not done, the squad will retreat again, because the suggestion was not.

Why is there such a condition? Chaos can appear either as a result of actions of a weak leader who is not listening to their people or the result of deliberate planting strategy of control through guilt.

источник:habrahabr.ru

Source: /users/1080