Vam, I have no problem with systems, but as you point out they are rife with inefficiency, incompetence and plain ordinary not giving a damn. However, I seriously doubt if there is anything that can be done about it. Inefficiency, incompetence, not giving a damn and ordinary stupidity are part and parcel of the human matrix, the human equation. When it comes to system, we have had countless systems over the course of our history and many, if not most of them would have worked well were it not for the human equation.
That is why we have to deal with the core issues of human care, concern and behavior before we can ever hope for a system to work well. As long as humans lie, cheat, steal, connive, and hustle each other for ego and profit, no system will work well. On Aug 6, 10:11 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > My choice is a very deliberate one, Gruff, just as I believe yours > would be. > > It's all about bringing the consequences of what you subscribe to into > the perspective. I find the inefficiency appalling and, from here on, > not affordable by humanity at large. That's definitely not limited to > the US, the West, the developed, or the first world. Most of us here, > most of the time, would not even be aware of their existence. > > For one, I feel we are already finding competition in capital intense > sectors just not ' competitive ' enough, on which benefits ( such as > in quality and price ) to people rests. I believe resources per capita > tommorrow are going to be still less to support competition in all > sectors, across scales of enterprise. My belief is similar to one that > says : Bad or poor quality is ( just so inefficient way of doing > things as to be ) unaffordable. The path you are wish to persist with > is ' bad,' in my assessment, as at this point in our history. > > Secondly, each time economies are led through ' crisis,' they in my > opinion lose close to 20 - 40 % of ' effective ' resources to once > again pick up the thread. Thank god, the economic value of sentiments > is actually getting to be recognised. Bhutan, one of the poorest > countries in the world, had shown the way two decades back when it > defined and measured the well - being of its people in Gross Happiness > Index / Product. > > Thirdly, and most importantly, all these inefficiencies and losses get > ' compensated ' by far from the lot of economically weaker sections of > the population. The weaker, the more adversly affected. > > The entire orientation of the system needs changing. I however would > like to make the most of the structure innovations and democratic > values natural to capitalist system. But, with socialist goals > covering the basic food, health and security needs of the people. > > There is nothing capitalist or socialist about what I belive in. Just > Pro - People, Pro - Poor. The capitalist system, in itself, as it is > now, is incapable of orienting itself towards those goals ! > On Aug 6, 8:37 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Vam, in this you and I are on opposite poles. I believe we are > > everything and can turn to no other place but ourselves for the root > > causes of our misbehavior. I agree my thoughts are presumptuous but I > > wouldn't call yours adolescent. Please offer me the same grace. I do > > however think that your path, while eventually leading to the same > > place as mine, is a very roundabout path to get there. And I do > > agree with systems such as you postulate, but only for short term > > temporary patches and fixes until we can get to the root causes which > > have been planted for a long time and go deep so it's going to take > > some doing to get down to them in many cases, such as is at hand. > > > On Aug 5, 7:16 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Gruff, you ( and I ) are nothing, nobodies, to really be " address > > > ( ing ) the root causes of humankind's misbehavior." You only have to > > > attempt with it with one person, anybody, you know. So, I find the > > > very thought presumptuous, and adolescent like. > > > > However, we all can and should try, in our own ways, provided we've > > > succeeded with ourself. I do it not because I have any hopes of > > > reclaiming some, but because that is how responsible I feel, for > > > myself. In short, because I cannot help myself from trying to do so > > > when I am faced with an occassion. Period. I rather consider the > > > entire characterstic leading to " humankind's misbehavior," the > > > nature of the cause, like the crookedness in a dog's tail ! > > > > In the meanwhile, I'd like to go for systems that would work. It would > > > be of course be more holistic, if we could work on the cause side too. > > > > On Aug 5, 6:55 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Vam, your exposition is interesting but if I'm reading you correctly, > > > > you seem to be saying that addressing the effects via a systemic > > > > methodology is more effective than attempting to address the root > > > > causes. Is this correct? If so I have to agree. That is akin to > > > > treating the symptoms of a disease rather than it's core cause. It > > > > will be a temporary fix at best. > > > > > That said, however, it seems that your method is the one most often > > > > chosen by our leaders, movers and shakers to correct the deeper > > > > problems in our society. But I disagree with the entire concept. > > > > Treating symptoms is MASH battlefield medicine and does nothing to > > > > alleviate or cure the root cause. Using your example regarding > > > > productivity and on-time attendance, if you set up a near perfect > > > > system to catch the tardy help you might eliminate the tardiness in > > > > the immediacy of the situation, but it changes nothing in that > > > > individual who is prone to being late. It does not change their > > > > attitude, value system, life view, motivation, effects of environment, > > > > etc. It merely makes them a scofflaw who has been forced to adapt to > > > > avoid being caught. Any real change would have to have a significant > > > > effect on that person's inner self to create a higher sense of > > > > responsibility, self-worth and moral behavior. > > > > > Seeking and treating the root causes may take longer but it's > > > > permanent and has a much greater and more positive effect on the > > > > individual and society as a whole. We cannot continue applying > > > > patchwork temporary fixes to deeper problems. I find it very > > > > difficult to accept that we can't address the root causes of > > > > humankind's misbehavior which is see as the only means of achieving > > > > the goals we seek. > > > > > On Aug 3, 10:43 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > You know, Gruff, I'll share a case we faced with a huge MNC. It was > > > > > about productivity which, in short, was about wastage ( pilferage, > > > > > stealing ) of resources, including time. One specific issue was on - > > > > > time attendance. Since it involves human beings, everything in our > > > > > backgound ( within and without ) causally converges on this issue ... > > > > > our attitude, value system and life view, motivation, effects of > > > > > environment, our home, inconsistencies within the organisation, our > > > > > commute and the means, etc. > > > > > > Clearly, addressing the causes would have been limited and taken a > > > > > long time for effect. The solution : Define the value and communicate > > > > > it clearly, including the effects of breach. The repercussions ranged > > > > > from reward to punishment, promotion to dismissal. All that was > > > > > required was installation of a transparent and fail - safe system at > > > > > the gate for satisfactory result. > > > > > > The result was not perfect, even though the system was close to > > > > > perfect in transparency and accuracy terms. The man or his nature, his > > > > > philosophy and his fears, were not material, of zilch relevance, so > > > > > long as one passed through the gate at 9 AM or before. If he didn't, > > > > > the system let him ( and others ) know. > > > > > > This is what I am speaking of. If we cannot address the cause(s), we > > > > > can have a transparent and thorough monitoring system to address the > > > > > effect(s). > > > > > > On Aug 3, 10:03 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Chris actually got this round going back on Aug 2, 1:11 pm with his > > > > > > series of one-liners but I'd like to see the both of you in this as > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > Nice summary Francis. Yes, I can see we are both arguing along very > > > > > > similar lines and aiming at the same goal. But I'd like to see you > > > > > > and Chris get into the fray as well. The more voices the more > > > > > > stable > > > > > > and productive the discussion would be. After all, we each know > > > > > > each > > > > > > other well enough to assess each others words fairly well. > > > > > > > /e > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 9:23 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Now this is what I call a discussion, Vam and gruff! (BB47 and > > > > > > > deripsni could both learn from you :-)) > > > > > > > > Maybe it's because the three of us have been around here for a > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > that I can really appreciate what both of you are saying, because > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > know something about the way the two of you think about a lot of > > > > > > > things. Actually, I see you both arguing along similar lines; Vam > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > a professional background in systems analysis and quality > > > > > > > management > > > > > > > and has a lot of experience in the practical work of building, > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > and changing systems, while keeping his gaze frimly fixed on the > > > > > > > goals > > > > > > > (QM as it should be be, but, in my experience, so seldom is); > > > > > > > gruff as > > > > > > > someone who sees people/societies trying stuff, getting into > > > > > > > messes, > > > > > > > starting over and, somehow, sometimes, getting it a bit more > > > > > > > right the > > > > > > > next time (that old 51%/49% optimistic analogy that I often doubt > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > always admire). > > > > > > > > So ... I think I'll stay out of this for a while and hope you both > > > > > > > carry on! > > > > > > > > Francis- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
