Monday, December 4, 2017
December 4, 2017
I read Management of the Absurd by Richard Farson to illustrate the cultural hold that the idealists have on this country. One of the tenets of idealism is "possibility thinking". If one is to pretend that "anything is possible" then one must suspend acknowledgement of reality. One must also embrace new ways of experiencing the world. Ways that aren't realistic but make up for realism in novelty and excitement. Mr. Farson's book is one of those novel and exciting experiences. It promises short cuts to efficacy and unlimited amounts of power. The kind of power to operate with impunity. No such thing of course exists. All actions have consequences. All decisions involve gains and losses. Not because I say so but because the attempt to operate with impunity is in conflict with metaphysical reality. In order to deal with reality, reality must first be consulted.
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
November 8, 2017
Chapter 22 of Richard Farson's Management of the Absurd is titled Everything We Try Works and Nothing Works. What Mr. Farson failed to consider when writing this book is that an absurdity is a contradiction and a contradiction cancels itself out so that what we are left with is nothing. A zero. If as the title suggests "nothing works" then we wouldn't bother to get out of bed.
Planning is an Ineffective Way to Bring About Change is the title of Chapter 23. And no, planning is not necessarily an effective way to bring about change it is an effective way to bring about goal completion.
Organizations Change Most by Surviving Calamities is the title of Chapter 24. Organizations change most when forced to change: Hostile takeovers and lawsuits are classic examples.
People that We Think Need Changing Are Pretty Good the Way they Are is the title of Chapter 25. Since no one is perfect everyone needs changing at least in certain areas of their life and yes they are pretty good but not the best they can be.
Chapter 26: Every Great Strength is a Great Weakness. Classic Hegelian dialectic. Every thesis has an anti-thesis and when clashed brings about a synthesis. Untrue contradictions only bring about nothing. A zero.
Chapter 27: Morale is unrelated to productivity. Morale is related to productivity (indirectly). Morale is related to motivation which is related (directly) to productivity.
Chapter 28: There are no Leaders, Only Leadership. Ridiculous on its face. Leadership is the quality that leaders exhibit. No leaders...no leadership.
Planning is an Ineffective Way to Bring About Change is the title of Chapter 23. And no, planning is not necessarily an effective way to bring about change it is an effective way to bring about goal completion.
Organizations Change Most by Surviving Calamities is the title of Chapter 24. Organizations change most when forced to change: Hostile takeovers and lawsuits are classic examples.
People that We Think Need Changing Are Pretty Good the Way they Are is the title of Chapter 25. Since no one is perfect everyone needs changing at least in certain areas of their life and yes they are pretty good but not the best they can be.
Chapter 26: Every Great Strength is a Great Weakness. Classic Hegelian dialectic. Every thesis has an anti-thesis and when clashed brings about a synthesis. Untrue contradictions only bring about nothing. A zero.
Chapter 27: Morale is unrelated to productivity. Morale is related to productivity (indirectly). Morale is related to motivation which is related (directly) to productivity.
Chapter 28: There are no Leaders, Only Leadership. Ridiculous on its face. Leadership is the quality that leaders exhibit. No leaders...no leadership.
Friday, November 3, 2017
November 3, 2017
Michael Crichton said of the book: " He irritated me (!). He provoked me (!). He made me nod, he made me smile and he made me shake my head...[He] reports more than experience; he gives us wisdom (?????)
Sunday, October 22, 2017
Sunday October 22, 2017
Chapter 17: "The Better Things are the Worse they Feel". Right away the author hedges his bet: "...we expect that our actions will produce satisfaction for those we try to help. But they seldom do - not for long anyway." (italics mine) Mr. Farson has just contradicted himself and the rest of the chapter is moot.
Part Six: Dilemmas of Change. Chapter 18: "We Think We Want Creativity or Change, But We Really Don't". Who is "we"? Is Mr. Farson writing about everybody? Just him and his family and friends? No answer. How does Mr. Farson define creativity and change? He doesn't. Again the author uses story-telling and verbal picture-painting to get across his point. Unfortunately he includes only those stories and pictures that tend to support his pre-conceived notions. No definitions, no facts, no logic = no communication.
Chapter 19: "We Want for Ourselves not What We are Missing, but More of what We Already Have." Again, who's "we"? You and the mouse in your pocket? Secondly, assuming that the statement is true, who cares? Mr. Farson attempts to answer that question in the final paragraph of the chapter: "The difficulty for all of us is that our absorption with what we do well may blind us to what will enable us to do even better." So what? Yet again in this chapter Mr. Farson has failed to state a problem much less a solution.
Chapter 20: "Big Changes are easier to Make than Small Ones". Taking this statement at face-value the author has asserted something that is counter-intuitive rather than absurd or paradoxical.
Chapter 21: "We learn not from Our Failures, but Our Successes and the Failures of Others". Again...who's "we"? Secondly, the statement is deterministic and false. Determinism, the attitude that people have no free-will and do what they do because they are forced to by powers beyond their control, is dead. The statement is also a "faulty dilemma" suggesting that the only way to learn is by trial-and-error. We learn because we want to know. We know because we have (unlike the author) done research.
Part Six: Dilemmas of Change. Chapter 18: "We Think We Want Creativity or Change, But We Really Don't". Who is "we"? Is Mr. Farson writing about everybody? Just him and his family and friends? No answer. How does Mr. Farson define creativity and change? He doesn't. Again the author uses story-telling and verbal picture-painting to get across his point. Unfortunately he includes only those stories and pictures that tend to support his pre-conceived notions. No definitions, no facts, no logic = no communication.
Chapter 19: "We Want for Ourselves not What We are Missing, but More of what We Already Have." Again, who's "we"? You and the mouse in your pocket? Secondly, assuming that the statement is true, who cares? Mr. Farson attempts to answer that question in the final paragraph of the chapter: "The difficulty for all of us is that our absorption with what we do well may blind us to what will enable us to do even better." So what? Yet again in this chapter Mr. Farson has failed to state a problem much less a solution.
Chapter 20: "Big Changes are easier to Make than Small Ones". Taking this statement at face-value the author has asserted something that is counter-intuitive rather than absurd or paradoxical.
Chapter 21: "We learn not from Our Failures, but Our Successes and the Failures of Others". Again...who's "we"? Secondly, the statement is deterministic and false. Determinism, the attitude that people have no free-will and do what they do because they are forced to by powers beyond their control, is dead. The statement is also a "faulty dilemma" suggesting that the only way to learn is by trial-and-error. We learn because we want to know. We know because we have (unlike the author) done research.
Thursday, October 12, 2017
Thursday, October 12, 2017
I have read chapters 13, 14, 15 and 16 from Richard Farson's book titled Management of the Absurd.
In Chapter 13: "Every act is a Political Act" Mr. Farson attempt to make the case that, at least as far a managing is concerned, every act is about power. "...every management act in some way redistributes or reinforces power." As examples Mr. Farson uses verbal pictures to reinforce the stereotype that he is trying to create.
I say that he is trying to create a stereotype because his conclusions are unwarranted and his evidence/proof is unsubstantiated. When someone fails to use facts and logic in reaching a conclusion it is because they are trying to create a superstition or a stereotype. Superstitions and stereotypes are appealing at first blush because they are shortcuts. They promise results without having to spend time and effort.
All of this is important because American counter-culture promotes superstition and stereotyping as a method of "empowering" their movement with the ultimate aim of creating socialist revolution and paradise.
Chapter 14: "The Best Resource for the Solution of Any Problem is the Person or Group that Presents the Problem" Mr. Farson engages in story-telling to put across his point. He tells stories about Carl Rogers and his consultation at a university. Mr. Farson is also quite the adept picture painter painting pictures of various self-help groups and of a management study. All of this is to create a "paradox" that in reality doesn't and can't exist again all for the creation of a movement the goal of which is to fulfill an idealistic fantasy.
"Organizations that Need Help Most Will Benefit from it Least" is the title of Chapter 15 and in it Mr. Farson attempts to manipulate the reader into going along with the idea that most companies are willfully blind about the need to change until it is too late.
By only looking for stories and pictures that support his pre-conceived notions Mr. Farson is able to manipulate readers into believing that "Individuals Are Almost Indestructible, but Organizations are Very Fragile". If Mr. Farson was more thorough he would be able to find stories and pictures that support the opposite of what he is proposing: General Motors and Dolly Madison to name but two.
Sunday, October 8, 2017
Sunday October 8, 2017
Yesterday I read Chapter 13 from the book titled Management of the Absurd by Richard Farson. The title of the chapter is "All acts are Political Acts".
In this chapter Mr. Farson posits the idea that all management acts are in fact political acts. In support of this "conclusion" Mr. Farson offers no evidence or proof but instead relies on story telling and verbal picture painting. The man-made-reality-is-the-only-reality premise of the chapter would be very attractive if it were true. Changing one's management style would then change the world. Change the world into what - we don't know.
In this chapter Mr. Farson posits the idea that all management acts are in fact political acts. In support of this "conclusion" Mr. Farson offers no evidence or proof but instead relies on story telling and verbal picture painting. The man-made-reality-is-the-only-reality premise of the chapter would be very attractive if it were true. Changing one's management style would then change the world. Change the world into what - we don't know.
Thursday October 5, 2017
On Tuesday I read Chapter 10 from the book Management of the Absurd by Richard Farson. The title of Chapter 10 is: "In Communication Form is more Important than Content". The chapter is divided up into four sections. An introductory section followed by "The Power of the Invisible", ""Where we sit Matters" and "Remembering Rituals".
In the introductory section the author claims that feelings are more important than words, mode of expression is more important than words and that corporate image is "a triumph of form over content".
In the second section Mr. Farson creates meta-messages that he claims are in hidden school curriculum and management training programs and that meta-messages are more powerful than the message itself.
In section three Richard Farson gives another example of form over content by describing how it is that people arrange themselves at business meetings. As the arrangement changes so does the form of the meeting.
In the last section Mr. Farson reminds us that "the feelings, the arrangements, the rituals, the physical and social design...are crucially important".
No where in this chapter does Mr. Farson define his terms. What is the difference between form and content? No answer. Also, Mr. Farson seems to suggest that form and content are actually the same.
Mr. Farson erroneously starts with the premise that ideas are true until proven false - a fallacy.
The attractiveness of this chapter and as a matter of fact the whole book comes from the illusion that one is being let in on a secret that one is being taught things that are esoteric. Shortcuts that will allow the reader to get an edge in the workplace. Too bad that the book fails to deliver.
In the introductory section the author claims that feelings are more important than words, mode of expression is more important than words and that corporate image is "a triumph of form over content".
In the second section Mr. Farson creates meta-messages that he claims are in hidden school curriculum and management training programs and that meta-messages are more powerful than the message itself.
In section three Richard Farson gives another example of form over content by describing how it is that people arrange themselves at business meetings. As the arrangement changes so does the form of the meeting.
In the last section Mr. Farson reminds us that "the feelings, the arrangements, the rituals, the physical and social design...are crucially important".
No where in this chapter does Mr. Farson define his terms. What is the difference between form and content? No answer. Also, Mr. Farson seems to suggest that form and content are actually the same.
Mr. Farson erroneously starts with the premise that ideas are true until proven false - a fallacy.
The attractiveness of this chapter and as a matter of fact the whole book comes from the illusion that one is being let in on a secret that one is being taught things that are esoteric. Shortcuts that will allow the reader to get an edge in the workplace. Too bad that the book fails to deliver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)