we are contributing to their self-esteem, whether we are discouraging them from thinking, or from taking responsibility for their own behavior. The two examples above, illustrate how we could have used a "scientific form of thinking" to come to a conclusion but the "force", whatever it may have been, that influenced that way of thinking, was very strong. The same remains true in business as it pertains to our managerial responsibilities. For example, if one always tends to look at a situation from a logical fashion, they might miss a better result that stems from a more creative outlook on the scenario. For instance, at my place of employment, a problem arose that entailed disappearing inventory. Instead of looking for a "creative" solution, management used an unsound form of logical thinking. They insisted on implementing control measures that became very tedious in nature for all persons involved. Ultimately, a more creative measure was instituted which allowed for "individual accountability" of persons involved rather than immediate accusations of a department as a whole. Many weeks of low employee morale, resulting in poor productivity could have been avoided by "brainstorming" creative measures rather then instituting what seemed like a logical and scientific measure. I can only speculate as to what "force of influ!ence" had an impact on the decision that was made. However, my opinion is that the Directors own "business culture" in a different industry, could have been to blame. In short, the Directors "perception" of the problem in the above example was not "reality". The disappearing inventory was not the fault of procedural department documentation. In looking for a logical explanation and applying a logical solution, he overlooked a more simple and rational resolution to the true "reality" that existed. This reality was that individuals were not being held "accountable" for their actions or mistakes. How do we a...
