Oh golly... these are great. I am saving to reference.
I love these human behavior principles and find most of them to be accurate.
I would add the Pareto Principle: that for many outcomes, roughly 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes (the "vital few"). Also, 20% of the problem tends to attract 80% of the effort... and thus results in 10% of the solution. Together, with the Shirky Principle, it seems to explain why none of our big social and economic problems never get solved. Doing real root-cause analysis and focusing like a laser on those causes is something we Americans seems to suck at.
By the way Brad, you are my oldest son's age, and although I think he is a smart and knowledgeable guy, I would have pegged you are being older given your collective wisdom demonstrated in your writing.
I have commented that the design of the system included people taking a break from their regular lives to agitate for cause, and when the protests were over the decisions made, go back their regular lives.
I think our fantastic economic success in creating so much leisure time for our upper class has led to this problem where their regular lives are meaningless and thus they seek to replace that lack of meaning with social cause. And once they become reliant on that, they natural perpetuate their need.
I was thinking of the professional paper-pusher with a lot of wealth and assets... after the crash of civilization he would be reliant on all those lowly blue collar people he looked down to help him survive. However, today he is smug in his righteousness that we need to force scarcity of traditional energy to drive up the costs thus impacting the ability of that lowly blue collar worker to fill his life meaning caring for his family.
I would add that guilt is a factor. Those with unearned wealth , or being rewarded well outside of the value of their effort, feel the need to absolve themselves. Of course this is done at the expense of others and in a way tht does not have any material effect on them.
So much covered, so I have to choose one, so I'll chose number one. I do think people have fewer friends today and for many reasons. They also have fewer relatives they see, or speak to and few if any are living close by. The net provides substitutes, like Facebook, and cell phones too often become a person's sole meeting ground for others. Also neighborhoods are often in flux, and people move here and there, not only away from friends, but family as well. Today more then ever, and more so in the last 4 or 5 years whole families have left parents, relatives and friends behind to live someplace else, better job, lower housing costs, safer neighborhood, and some places like NY and San Francisco, well, I don't think I have to day more. Doing Ancestry I find relatives living next door, or up the block, and someone always home, since moms didn't work, and grandma was living with a relative and not in a nursing home, now, it's more likely another borough, another state.
When I was nine my hand went through a glass door panel, and I severed all the tendons in my right arm. My mom was food shopping but I didn't need her since my friend's Nanna was there to wrap my arm in her apron and rush me to the local pharmacy where he washed away the blood and wrapped my wrist so I couldn't see the open wound, then back home she found two men who worked local and they drove me to the hospital then came back with my mom. I guess you could say only in a small town.
I think it might also be a problem that for people who socialize on the internet might not really learn the skills necessary to fit in to a group that they haven't fully selected themselves. You might be able to find a group that tolerates super weird and antisocial behavior online but probably not in meat space.
Nils I'm sorry I was so sensitive. I was listening to another podcast, or whatever, and something was said that I thought was really offensive and I over reacted to what you said. Sorry, and it's really late.
Why don't you be more direct in what you're saying so that one can respond to you with a fuller understanding of what I perceive as insulting, and I apologize if I misunderstood the content of your post.
I would argue that the half of the Peter Principle you mention is one of the few things we are improving on. this was very bad in the 60's and 70's. The downsizing of corporate america tended to address that. You see fewer people being promoted on the basis of time served and more on both merit and job fit. What we has continued is the half of the PP that relates to bureaucracy. He noted that the number of officers in the British navy grew exponentially larger than the growth of the navy. "never have so few been led by so many." Take a look at our gov and edu bureaucracies.
I think in business in general hierarchies are being flattened and people are a lot more self-organized - e.g. ideas like Agile and Scrum in IT come from a desire of no longer being managed by people who know nothing about software development. A lot of the low level clerical work has also disappeared, e.g. there almost no more secretaries now.
With an aging population having a lot of people age out of technical work and into management is no longer an option. You're going to end up with a workforce that's half managers. Corporations would do well to develop career paths that don't require moving from the technical side to management and find other ways to reward experience.
What I still think happens is that people get put into (nominal) leadership positions without having the requisite skill or affinity. I see a lot of corporations from the inside and it's staggering how chaotic everything is because nobody really has a plan or sets rules. At the same time LinkedIn is full of people pontificating about Leadership.
cant agree enough. Per your second paragraph, getting away from a college degree being some kind of Holy Grail seems to be taking hold. In addition to that, teaching that technical competence is equal and sometimes better than the managerial path is something we need to do more.
I find the people pontificating on Leadership ,mostly just trying to grab eyeballs to sell their consultancy services. The ones that are "experts" seem to exist to affirm the egos of bad managers.
that being said finding the right fit for leadership positions has always been and always will be a difficult proposition. We make it more difficult with the short termism that comes with the obsession on daily stock prices. (Versus long term value.) The MBA class (disclosure, that includes me,) has a lot to answer for.
I also get the feeling that a lot of management seems now to be based on treating employees like children, obfuscating hierarchies and acting like everyone needs to be friends. Any responsibility for failure is diluted, there is no way to give to honest feedback without running afoul of speech codes and above all in many organizations people act like the whole endeavor isn't about making a profit. And then this all collides with market forces.
Just the fact that you curated the list says a lot Brad- kudos to you and Happy Birthday!
#12 is a downer though. I have firmly believed in the power of rational thought to overcome the media-spewed propaganda. My husband and I have disagreed over the years. He argues for the power of media to influence thought, while I have been steadfast that thinking people should know better. Looks like he wins!
And I guess I’m even older than most readers- my son is 39.
A late coming comment, because I got lost in the links. Wow you have a lot going on in your head. So many of your musings are just begging to be shared...my family had to put up with me talking out loud, sharing revelations while reading. And I’m not even at 32 yet 🤓. I agree with the commenter who said ‘best read of the day’ but I’d edit that to say ‘of the week’. Maybe month. Each idea could stand in its own as a post.
The Paradox of Consensus reminded me of an interview with Einstein. He was asked what he thought about eighty scientists signing a letter disagreeing with his General Theory of Relativity.
"If I had been wrong, it would only have required one."
Happy Birthday Brad! Thanks for the list. I'm a big believer in #s 18 and 28! Maybe #5 since my spouse and I are nothing alike but have been happily married for years.
Oh golly... these are great. I am saving to reference.
I love these human behavior principles and find most of them to be accurate.
I would add the Pareto Principle: that for many outcomes, roughly 80% of consequences come from 20% of causes (the "vital few"). Also, 20% of the problem tends to attract 80% of the effort... and thus results in 10% of the solution. Together, with the Shirky Principle, it seems to explain why none of our big social and economic problems never get solved. Doing real root-cause analysis and focusing like a laser on those causes is something we Americans seems to suck at.
By the way Brad, you are my oldest son's age, and although I think he is a smart and knowledgeable guy, I would have pegged you are being older given your collective wisdom demonstrated in your writing.
He is also the same age as my oldest son.
This was easily the most interesting read of the day.
Good stuff!!
the shirky Principle is also known as the March of Dimes effect. MOD was to cure Polio. Polio gone MOD still here.
FWIW I think one of the keys to my personal happiness is not being subject to #19
I have commented that the design of the system included people taking a break from their regular lives to agitate for cause, and when the protests were over the decisions made, go back their regular lives.
I think our fantastic economic success in creating so much leisure time for our upper class has led to this problem where their regular lives are meaningless and thus they seek to replace that lack of meaning with social cause. And once they become reliant on that, they natural perpetuate their need.
I was thinking of the professional paper-pusher with a lot of wealth and assets... after the crash of civilization he would be reliant on all those lowly blue collar people he looked down to help him survive. However, today he is smug in his righteousness that we need to force scarcity of traditional energy to drive up the costs thus impacting the ability of that lowly blue collar worker to fill his life meaning caring for his family.
I would add that guilt is a factor. Those with unearned wealth , or being rewarded well outside of the value of their effort, feel the need to absolve themselves. Of course this is done at the expense of others and in a way tht does not have any material effect on them.
Agree with that. The secondary add-on factor is their hate of people that earned it.
So much covered, so I have to choose one, so I'll chose number one. I do think people have fewer friends today and for many reasons. They also have fewer relatives they see, or speak to and few if any are living close by. The net provides substitutes, like Facebook, and cell phones too often become a person's sole meeting ground for others. Also neighborhoods are often in flux, and people move here and there, not only away from friends, but family as well. Today more then ever, and more so in the last 4 or 5 years whole families have left parents, relatives and friends behind to live someplace else, better job, lower housing costs, safer neighborhood, and some places like NY and San Francisco, well, I don't think I have to day more. Doing Ancestry I find relatives living next door, or up the block, and someone always home, since moms didn't work, and grandma was living with a relative and not in a nursing home, now, it's more likely another borough, another state.
When I was nine my hand went through a glass door panel, and I severed all the tendons in my right arm. My mom was food shopping but I didn't need her since my friend's Nanna was there to wrap my arm in her apron and rush me to the local pharmacy where he washed away the blood and wrapped my wrist so I couldn't see the open wound, then back home she found two men who worked local and they drove me to the hospital then came back with my mom. I guess you could say only in a small town.
Nils
39 min ago
You reported this comment. Hide
I think it might also be a problem that for people who socialize on the internet might not really learn the skills necessary to fit in to a group that they haven't fully selected themselves. You might be able to find a group that tolerates super weird and antisocial behavior online but probably not in meat space.
I edited the comment, I realize that it sounded like I'm talking about you personally, if that was the impression you got I apologize.
Nils I'm sorry I was so sensitive. I was listening to another podcast, or whatever, and something was said that I thought was really offensive and I over reacted to what you said. Sorry, and it's really late.
It's early for me and I might be undercaffeinated. I'll delete my comment and try to come up with something better thought out.
Why don't you be more direct in what you're saying so that one can respond to you with a fuller understanding of what I perceive as insulting, and I apologize if I misunderstood the content of your post.
I would argue that the half of the Peter Principle you mention is one of the few things we are improving on. this was very bad in the 60's and 70's. The downsizing of corporate america tended to address that. You see fewer people being promoted on the basis of time served and more on both merit and job fit. What we has continued is the half of the PP that relates to bureaucracy. He noted that the number of officers in the British navy grew exponentially larger than the growth of the navy. "never have so few been led by so many." Take a look at our gov and edu bureaucracies.
I think in business in general hierarchies are being flattened and people are a lot more self-organized - e.g. ideas like Agile and Scrum in IT come from a desire of no longer being managed by people who know nothing about software development. A lot of the low level clerical work has also disappeared, e.g. there almost no more secretaries now.
With an aging population having a lot of people age out of technical work and into management is no longer an option. You're going to end up with a workforce that's half managers. Corporations would do well to develop career paths that don't require moving from the technical side to management and find other ways to reward experience.
What I still think happens is that people get put into (nominal) leadership positions without having the requisite skill or affinity. I see a lot of corporations from the inside and it's staggering how chaotic everything is because nobody really has a plan or sets rules. At the same time LinkedIn is full of people pontificating about Leadership.
cant agree enough. Per your second paragraph, getting away from a college degree being some kind of Holy Grail seems to be taking hold. In addition to that, teaching that technical competence is equal and sometimes better than the managerial path is something we need to do more.
I find the people pontificating on Leadership ,mostly just trying to grab eyeballs to sell their consultancy services. The ones that are "experts" seem to exist to affirm the egos of bad managers.
that being said finding the right fit for leadership positions has always been and always will be a difficult proposition. We make it more difficult with the short termism that comes with the obsession on daily stock prices. (Versus long term value.) The MBA class (disclosure, that includes me,) has a lot to answer for.
I also get the feeling that a lot of management seems now to be based on treating employees like children, obfuscating hierarchies and acting like everyone needs to be friends. Any responsibility for failure is diluted, there is no way to give to honest feedback without running afoul of speech codes and above all in many organizations people act like the whole endeavor isn't about making a profit. And then this all collides with market forces.
For us sticklers, you need to edit the Potato Paradox to include "by weight" after each appearance of "water".
If a potato is 99% water by weight, then it is 1% solids by weight.
If a potato is 98% water by weight, then it is 2% solids by weight.
In order to double the percentage-by-weight of solids, you must halve the percentage of water by weight.
Intuition is (apparently?) % by volume.
OK, now you've got me feeling pretty nerdy myself.
Made the change, thank you!
Just the fact that you curated the list says a lot Brad- kudos to you and Happy Birthday!
#12 is a downer though. I have firmly believed in the power of rational thought to overcome the media-spewed propaganda. My husband and I have disagreed over the years. He argues for the power of media to influence thought, while I have been steadfast that thinking people should know better. Looks like he wins!
And I guess I’m even older than most readers- my son is 39.
Yikes. Grandkids older than that
Great list. I'm not that influenced by it, but I'm sure others will be
A brilliant list. Happy birthday!
Wow. cool stuff. Thank you.
A late coming comment, because I got lost in the links. Wow you have a lot going on in your head. So many of your musings are just begging to be shared...my family had to put up with me talking out loud, sharing revelations while reading. And I’m not even at 32 yet 🤓. I agree with the commenter who said ‘best read of the day’ but I’d edit that to say ‘of the week’. Maybe month. Each idea could stand in its own as a post.
The Paradox of Consensus reminded me of an interview with Einstein. He was asked what he thought about eighty scientists signing a letter disagreeing with his General Theory of Relativity.
"If I had been wrong, it would only have required one."
Happy Birthday Brad! Thanks for the list. I'm a big believer in #s 18 and 28! Maybe #5 since my spouse and I are nothing alike but have been happily married for years.
Excellent. I bet there are many connections between this list and various "cognitive dissonances."
Only half way through and loving this great piece. Thanks!
Well-said