> > Dave Birren, wrote:
> > Unfortunately, we are caught up in a XCalvinist/Puritanical culture that
> > puts a high premium on punishment and the victim mentality, two elements
> > that militate strongly against forgiveness and learning.
>
> In reply to Dave Birren, Roy Winkler wrote:
> The United States has a higher percentage of its population in
> prison than any other country in the world (CNN, 12-20-95). This says
> volumes about our culture.
> and Richard Karash asked Roy to say more before distributing msg:
> ...what conclusion are you drawing from the
> in-prision pop figures and what does that say about learning organizations.
I was citing the prison population issue to support Dave's
conention that we put a high premium on punishment here in America. And,
I believe there is a link between our cultural value for retribution and
the discouragement of active learning in organizations.
In order to learn effectively, one must have latitude to
experiment with the boundaries of okay-ness regarding whatever subject is
being learned. This often requires some measure of risk-taking. For
example, if given the choice, most of us would rather learn to drive an
automobile in an abandoned parking lot before graduating to rush-hour
mahem. The issue is managing risk. Recognizing that driving over a
yellow parking lot line brings less pain than driving into the back of a
truck, we arrange the situation so that we have the luxury of making the
mistakes we need to make in order to learn the task --- without incurring
prohibitive costs to our person or welfare.
This is something you can hear from persons with teenage children
if you listen closely. Parental concerns are often translated into
risk-management behaviors. The underlying premise is, "I want Johnny (or
Julia) to make it through the teen years without getting damaged."
Therefore, the child is told to be home at 11:00 PM instead of midnight.
There are parental sanctions against pre-marital sex. There may be
sanctions against who the child can date, or whether the child can ride on
a motorcycle.
Managing risks is an important activity for humans. We hesitate
to send troops to Bosnia because of possible adverse consequences. We
hesitate to go outside in a blizzard. We tend not to pick fights with
very large mean people. In each circumstance, we are measuring the
possibility of gain against the possibility of loss.
This same risk-management activity is always an issue for members
of an organization. We are continually weighing the value of engaging in
an activity or forwarding an idea against possible adverse consequences of
doing so. The more severe the potential consequences, the higher the risk
factor. The higher the risk factor, the less likelihood that one will
experiment with a new idea or process. Therefore, less learning goes on.
In the American culture, we value punishment and retribution,
perhaps more than many other cultures. As Dave intimates, some attribute
this strong cultural bias to our puritanical roots. We also value
organization and procedure very highly, particularly the SJ temperaments
(Sensing Judgers, MBTI, Kiersey Temperament Sorter) who are running most
organizations.
Businesses and organizations are typically structured around sets
of procedures that are designed to produce repeatable results. The
financial figures are to be out on the first of the month. All sales
quotes are to be submitted to the head buyer before approval. Don't make
a mistake.
Since "mistake" in this culture is defined as a violation of
procedures (or rules), the savvy "risk manager" (read that "employee")
works hard to adhere to the procedures. In other words, he/she stays well
within the risk envelope. To try out innovative ideas, no matter how
ingenious, in such an environment, places one at risk.
By having a cultural bias toward retribution, members of an
organization see it as "just" to fire an employee or otherwise assess
harsh penalties for a wide range of infractions against the rules (or
procedures). This dynamic sets up the severity of the consequences. In
addition, we frequently observe the organization reward "old Harlan" for
enduring the organization for 25 years without making waves. While
"Sally" is terminated because she argued with the boss about a procedure
that required her to keep records that she believed didn't add value.
What's a body to do? Some will take risks anyhow and learn from
them, no matter how bitter the lessons. Others will follow old Harlan.
What can organizations do? They can recognize their cultural
proclivity toward retribution and design rules (or procedures) which tend
to counteract that bias by providing an arena of consent for making
mistakes in the pursuit of improvement.
-- @__Roy_J._Winkler,_AAS,_BSM... @__Consultant:_OD/HRD/Group_Dynamics @__UAW/GM____Anderson,_Indiana___USA @__E-Mail: rwinkler@iquest.net