© dr kelvyn youngman, aug 2012, revised may 20141 why good people appear to go bad in two parts...

© Dr Kelvyn Youngman, Aug 2012, Revised May 2014 1

Why Good People Appear To Go Bad

In Two Parts

Part I – Technical Part II – Sociological


Part I – Technical



In Chicago with Sergey Ivanov I drew this diagram as a discussion point as to Why Good People Appear To Go Bad …



… and it is not the people, it is the system – right?



Except, guess who made the system – the people of course



The people are indeed the system



So, what is the issue?



Well, the issue is that these modern post-1850 things all incorporatea linear serial dependency

> > Linear Serial Dependency > >



“LSD” for short




Patients, papers, products, planes, plans, whatever; move step by step, task by task, from a beginning towards an end




Every hand-off in the process constitutes a dependency with an inevitable wait time and every step in the process contains variability




The same type of job takes different times at the same place on different occasions and never the same times at different places




The consequence is that the process as a whole always performs way below average expectations




So what is the one wrong thing that we do to “fix” this problem – always?




We go and add an additional dependency in to make things “better” …




… and things only become worse – much worse




Think of the now thankfully rare case of the “quality inspector”




You can’t inspect quality in, it is already there!




Let’s add in a few more dependencies for good measure




Adding in additional dependency increases the length, or rather the duration, of the process and also increases the variability within the process …




… moreover it provides an opportunity to move the accountability, and responsibility, from the upstream cause towards the downstream effect



It absolves the upstream cause of the downstream impact without ever resolving the actual cause





In the absence of true knowledge of the system, absolution seems to be the name of the game




What we get instead is phoney conflict and collusion with the status quo – good people appear to go bad




What then of the vertical component?




What then of Jaques managerial accountability hierarchy?




Jaques argues that the superior is accountable for the execution of the tasks that the subordinate is responsible for


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



Given that this process is already a mess what do you think our manager is going to do?


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



He is going to appoint a deputy-vice-assistant manager (acting) – right?

UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility




The purpose of this is to absolve himself of accountability for a process that he does not fundamentally understand

UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility




Of course with an additional vertical dependency we have additional delay with each decision, increased variability, and less and less direct communication


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



And so it goes until we fundamentally have an even bigger “mess” in which we all become “victims”


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



And if we are victims, then we are certainly victims of our own knowledge and understanding – or rather the lack thereof


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility




UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility

We have to remove the “noise” – the extraneous dependencies – to allow the system to work once again




UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility

Both in the vertical sense ….



… and in the horizontal sense too


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



And to do that we have to add knowledge and understanding back in


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



Requisite Organization for the vertical interaction – the integration aspects …


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility



… and Theory of Constraints for the horizontal interaction – the co-ordination aspects


UpwardsConverging

Accountability

DownwardsDiverging

Responsibility


End Of Part I


Part II – Sociological


Why Some Good People Then Appear Badder

But there’s more …



What if individuals within the system “tickle the till,” engage in “shrinkage,” perpetrate acts of fraud or corruption, or even worse?



Bad people per se are rare, they are the psychopaths and sociopaths of this world, and they don’t understand the harm that they cause …



… and they succeed because of the good faith of others and because of the inaction of knowledgeable bystanders



History shows that their psychopathy can attain incredible leverage through the actions of others when those actions remain unchallenged …



History also shows that by challenging these actions we can also hugely constrain this leverage



Mostly we fear to challenge or to confront, and that is the thing that works in their favour



Let’s leave these rare but nevertheless extreme examples …



… and let’s concentrate instead on good people who go bad due to the surrounding sociology rather than underlying psychopathy


Good people who act in bad faith are much more common, they recognise the harm that they cause and they recognise the need for secrecy …




… we commonly call these people the perpetrator

Perpetrator



And the people who they directly or indirectly harm we call the victims

Perpetrator

Victims



The victims are usually unknowing of their role

Perpetrator

Victims



The success of the perpetrator is based upon other’s good faith and the inaction of knowledgeable bystanders

Perpetrator

Victims



What is it then that tips a good person in this way?

Perpetrator

Victims



In order to operate in bad faith we need both a will for it to occur and a way for it to happen

Perpetrator

Victims



The will, paradoxically, comes from the misplaced sense of the perpetrator perceiving themselves to be a “victim” of some sort …

Perceived Victim

Victims



… or of representing the victims of a perceived relative and local wrong that they wish to right …

Perceived Victim

Victims



… a sense of entitlement for past dues

Perceived Victim

Victims



The bad faith of the perpetrator is, in actuality, a product of their own good faith – at least initially

Perceived Victim

Victims



The isolated argument, the sense of entitlement, the righting of a perceived wrong, becomes self-reinforcing in the absence of external scrutiny

Perceived Victim

Victims



“too little recognised, too little remunerated, too little rewarded, and too little resourced,” …

Perceived Victim

Victims



... and that is just the rationale of one group of senior medical professionals

Perceived Victim

Victims



In righting the perceived relative wrong, the perpetrator, in turn, commits an absolute wrong in terms of the whole system

Perpetrator

Victims



Those who are wronged, either inside or outside the immediate system are indeed the true victims

Perpetrator

True Victims



Once the will is established, the way depends upon some sort of; moral, or hierarchical, or technical, or informational superiority …

Perpetrator

True Victims



… it is this positional authority that ensures the necessary lack of scrutinyor the ability to hide the evidence from such scrutiny

Perpetrator

True Victims



Fraud and corruption is covert, it is not sanctioned by the larger group and it is considered by the larger group to be wrong

Perpetrator

True Victims



But what if somebody does know?

Perpetrator

True Victims



What if there is, say, a knowledgeable bystander?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



What if there are multiple bystanders?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Or multiple perpetrators?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Surely the larger these groups are, the greater the chance of being found out?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Well, no, because the sociology is one of fear of separation from that special group, the so-called in-group

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



And thus we seek to avoid such separation regardless of whether it is real or whether it is imagined

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Fear of separation from one’s colleagues, one’s family, one’s standing in the community is sufficient to “toe the line” …

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



… or maybe that should be “toe the lie” …

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



… even if those knowledgeable individuals do not personally subscribe to the sense of entitlement that supports the larger wrong

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



The fear of separation is substantiated by a set of negative fantasies, mythological stories of bad things that might just plausibly happen …

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



… if we act in a morally and ethically correct way

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Separation anxiety is so great that the “system” can remain metastable much longer than could otherwise rationally be expected …

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



… even when the knowledge becomes much more broadly known, the system may still remain extant – in denial that the problem even exists

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



So where is the solution?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



How do we get out of what we have got into?

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



The solution lies with those who are knowledgeable of the matter and who are willing to act in a morally and ethically correct manner

Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander



Perpetrator

True Victims

Bystander

Such acts of courage function as “lines in the sand” …



… such lines in the sand release the perpetrators from their self-reinforcing bind …

True Victims

BystanderPerpetrator



… they release the victims as well …

Bystander

True Victims



… and everyone else too

Bystander


End

Website: www.dbrmfg.co.nz

E mail: youngman“at”dbrmfg.co.nz

© dr kelvyn youngman, aug 2012, revised may 20141 why good people appear to go bad in two parts...

Documents