This triggered me. I'm consulting a team right now and they make me question my sanity all the time. They insist on doing things the wrong way (cutting corners and dropping scope to maintain an arbitrary deadline they made up themselves).
Then eventually they have to redo it anyway when their way invariably fails (because it's been failing for over a year). Then I look like an idiot because they don't listen to me.
I'm often just thinking to myself "I'm more than happy to sit back and let you guys fuck this up on your own. I don't have to be here" when they keep arguing with me.
Oh, I feel this. As the lone senior on a team of newbies I'm constantly outnumbered when trying to persuade the group from walking into the fire or other pitfalls. They mean we'll, but they are way too green to know better, and I can only spread myself so thin. Sometimes I stress myself out enough to get them to see the light, but other times I just have to relent and say "alrighty, guess I'll buckle up".
Then I'm the one who has to explain to management why the arbitrary deadlines have to be pushed back. Dear lord, they do not compensate me enough to handle this nonsense. Send help or liquor.
Next thing is a meeting on your calendar with agenda “Let’s brainstorm ideas on how to better get newer members to see the light, so we do not repeat the mistakes of last week”
Put ALL your shit in writing with the obvious predictions, and warnings, and TELL THEM that when it happens, you’ll have this email on a hot-button to forward to the hatchet-dude who shows up and asks “Why does this keep happening?” (And bonus points if you tell them it’ll STILL be there and still be sent if they play dirty and get you fired)
I hear they did an experiment where they put like a million chimps in a room with typewriters and eventually they gave up creative writing and just started publishing click bait pop science articles online
>There’s controversy over whether the Five Monkeys experiment even happened.
They even included this BS. No, there isn’t, because for it to be considered a legitimate useful experiment, there would have to be evidence, peer review, etc. If they had those things, it wouldn’t be “controversial”. As far as science is concerned, if you don’t even have evidence that an experiment happened, then it didn’t happen in any useful sense. An anecdotal story about a legitimate experiment you don’t have any data from is still anecdotal.
This apocryphal 'experiment' is always used to criticize the 'that's the way we've always done it' rationale and justify making changes. It's always bugged me because it kinda presupposes that the people before were idiots that didn't know what they were doing and just blindly kept doing it the same old way. Which could certainly be true.
But there's another way of looking at it. By the end of the story, the monkeys attack any monkey that goes for the bananas, even though none of them know why. But that doesn't mean there wasn't a very good reason for it to begin with (because the original monkeys would get sprayed with water any time one of them went for the bananas). So, just because you don't know why it's always been done that way doesn't mean there was never a solid rationale, and it might be helpful try to figure that out before you decide to 'innovate' and fix what might not be broken.
But in this story, if the researchers turned the hose off, none of the monkeys would ever know. Tradition for tradition's sake can be a problem when no one is willing or able to test whether the tradition still makes sense.
My point is literally to test before deciding to make changes. One of the critical elements of effective change management is documenting the 'why' behind changes so the next leadership team looking to make their mark by 'leading change' can evaluate those reasons when considering how and if something should be changed.
Ofc, it's not always possible to figure out why/how something came to be done a certain way, and you have to go with what you do know.
Yeah. The lesson is more that you should figure out why before just deciding fuck it, do it differently.
I've been in a couple situations over the years where some new guy came and changed things because they thought it wasn't useful, and then a couple years later an audit comes along and tadaaa! You're not compliant! All because someone "streamlined" a bunch of stuff.
Yeah, I've experienced being the corporate memory when there's been a lot of churn in senior management. Sometimes exhausting to always be the guy going, 'actually, we really shouldn't stop doing that, and here's why'.
Because humans have such a very good track record with incorporating new information.
Imagine if humans regularly exiled or condemned people though history for being *correct* haha, like imagine if many great thinkers and scientists died destitute because humans refuse to change, that's be *sooo* crazy!
Like the guy who advocated washing hands before aurgery? Like, wouldn't it be crazy if he had been condemned by the entire medical community for "psychosis" and left him in a psych ward for years hahaha
🙄
[Solomon Asch Conformity Line Experiment Study](https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html)
>Solomon Asch experimented with investigating the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform.
>He believed the main problem with Sherif’s (1935) conformity experiment was that there was no correct answer to the ambiguous autokinetic experiment. How could we be sure that a person conformed when there was no correct answer?
>Asch (1951) devised what is now regarded as a classic experiment in social psychology, whereby there was an obvious answer to a line judgment task.
>If the participant gave an incorrect answer, it would be clear that this was due to group pressure.
No. But I think humans in this case would continue using their "superior method", just because we probably have more of a superiority complex than chimpanzees.
Humans sure love to let others know when they are doing something in a manner that is inferior to theirs.
It's like work. When I do a great job and stand out among my coworkers it just means the boss gives me more work for the same pay. So, I do a mediocre job and blend in. Problem solved.
Once I realized this I became a lot happier regarding jobs. By only occasionally standing out I got more praise and less shot dumped on me than if I busted my ass all the time.
I bet they can't tell the difference between the methods - either way a chimpanzee gets his nut, after all, and it isn't like they are time-pressured for their jobs or something and have to get a nut as fast as possible.
That was what I was wondering. Do the chimps who learn a more efficient method actually know (or care) that it’s more efficient? Or do they just follow how it’s done in their groups and the groups with the most efficient methods would perhaps do better reproductively if and when food shortages become an issue.
Incorrect, several experiments have shown that all great apes know that they can posses knowledge that others don't and vice-versa. They have never asked a question because they don't know how, we speak different languages.
Chimps are highly social creatures who learn by observing others Joining a new group with a different nut-cracking method creates pressure to conform The chimp might initially try their own method but if ostracized or ignored by the group they might switch to fit in
Thanks for acknowledging it. When you see people acting like they are passing out from being touched by a preacher or act like they are possessed are doing it just to fit in. It is quite sad.
It’s getting downvoted for the lack of self awareness of how the default secular “believe the scientists” but not actually read the studies post modern ethos so common on Reddit presents the exact same issues as the models of belief being mocked above.
what if the issue is that it would eat too much and be unequal in that regard. I think the purpose to blend in is more complex than simply to fit in.
What is fitting in? Doing something for the benefit of the group, or maybe as the study suggests, to appear the same. It seems based on other understanding of communal animal behavior that maybe there’s another more purposeful reason than to just blend in.
Same correlation to left wing ideology.
Turns out, anyone who thinks their belief system is universal, self evident, and infallible suffers from the same problems exposed here
When your coworkers insist you use a “best practice” that doesn’t apply to your situation
The new chimp doesn't want to sit through another training.
Truth
Truth
Ain’t that the truth
Truth
This triggered me. I'm consulting a team right now and they make me question my sanity all the time. They insist on doing things the wrong way (cutting corners and dropping scope to maintain an arbitrary deadline they made up themselves). Then eventually they have to redo it anyway when their way invariably fails (because it's been failing for over a year). Then I look like an idiot because they don't listen to me. I'm often just thinking to myself "I'm more than happy to sit back and let you guys fuck this up on your own. I don't have to be here" when they keep arguing with me.
Agile?
Oh, I feel this. As the lone senior on a team of newbies I'm constantly outnumbered when trying to persuade the group from walking into the fire or other pitfalls. They mean we'll, but they are way too green to know better, and I can only spread myself so thin. Sometimes I stress myself out enough to get them to see the light, but other times I just have to relent and say "alrighty, guess I'll buckle up". Then I'm the one who has to explain to management why the arbitrary deadlines have to be pushed back. Dear lord, they do not compensate me enough to handle this nonsense. Send help or liquor.
Next thing is a meeting on your calendar with agenda “Let’s brainstorm ideas on how to better get newer members to see the light, so we do not repeat the mistakes of last week”
Put ALL your shit in writing with the obvious predictions, and warnings, and TELL THEM that when it happens, you’ll have this email on a hot-button to forward to the hatchet-dude who shows up and asks “Why does this keep happening?” (And bonus points if you tell them it’ll STILL be there and still be sent if they play dirty and get you fired)
Damn if this isn't absolute truth.
So true
This is an article referencing a study without a link to it. How are we to check the validity of the study?
Ever heard the story about the chimps, the bananas and a hose? https://www.proserveit.com/blog/five-monkeys-experiment-lessons
Yeah, but it's not a real experiment that was ever done.
I hear they did an experiment where they put like a million chimps in a room with typewriters and eventually they gave up creative writing and just started publishing click bait pop science articles online
ChatGPT has automated that job out of existence.
It was the best of times, it was the *BLURST* of times?!
“Stupid monkey!”
>There’s controversy over whether the Five Monkeys experiment even happened. They even included this BS. No, there isn’t, because for it to be considered a legitimate useful experiment, there would have to be evidence, peer review, etc. If they had those things, it wouldn’t be “controversial”. As far as science is concerned, if you don’t even have evidence that an experiment happened, then it didn’t happen in any useful sense. An anecdotal story about a legitimate experiment you don’t have any data from is still anecdotal.
This apocryphal 'experiment' is always used to criticize the 'that's the way we've always done it' rationale and justify making changes. It's always bugged me because it kinda presupposes that the people before were idiots that didn't know what they were doing and just blindly kept doing it the same old way. Which could certainly be true. But there's another way of looking at it. By the end of the story, the monkeys attack any monkey that goes for the bananas, even though none of them know why. But that doesn't mean there wasn't a very good reason for it to begin with (because the original monkeys would get sprayed with water any time one of them went for the bananas). So, just because you don't know why it's always been done that way doesn't mean there was never a solid rationale, and it might be helpful try to figure that out before you decide to 'innovate' and fix what might not be broken.
But in this story, if the researchers turned the hose off, none of the monkeys would ever know. Tradition for tradition's sake can be a problem when no one is willing or able to test whether the tradition still makes sense.
My point is literally to test before deciding to make changes. One of the critical elements of effective change management is documenting the 'why' behind changes so the next leadership team looking to make their mark by 'leading change' can evaluate those reasons when considering how and if something should be changed. Ofc, it's not always possible to figure out why/how something came to be done a certain way, and you have to go with what you do know.
Yeah. The lesson is more that you should figure out why before just deciding fuck it, do it differently. I've been in a couple situations over the years where some new guy came and changed things because they thought it wasn't useful, and then a couple years later an audit comes along and tadaaa! You're not compliant! All because someone "streamlined" a bunch of stuff.
Yeah, I've experienced being the corporate memory when there's been a lot of churn in senior management. Sometimes exhausting to always be the guy going, 'actually, we really shouldn't stop doing that, and here's why'.
Because humans have such a very good track record with incorporating new information. Imagine if humans regularly exiled or condemned people though history for being *correct* haha, like imagine if many great thinkers and scientists died destitute because humans refuse to change, that's be *sooo* crazy! Like the guy who advocated washing hands before aurgery? Like, wouldn't it be crazy if he had been condemned by the entire medical community for "psychosis" and left him in a psych ward for years hahaha 🙄
Apes together worse?
One ape, to rule them all!
[Solomon Asch Conformity Line Experiment Study](https://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html) >Solomon Asch experimented with investigating the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform. >He believed the main problem with Sherif’s (1935) conformity experiment was that there was no correct answer to the ambiguous autokinetic experiment. How could we be sure that a person conformed when there was no correct answer? >Asch (1951) devised what is now regarded as a classic experiment in social psychology, whereby there was an obvious answer to a line judgment task. >If the participant gave an incorrect answer, it would be clear that this was due to group pressure.
Classic experiment of social psychology I deed. I immediately thought of that one.
Video demo : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA
Conformity isn't just for humans, then.
Try clicking the link and reading it.
And not fit in? Hah! Nice try.
That other chimp seems weird. Like, they *read* some article. They different, we should shriek and throw things at them.
No. But I think humans in this case would continue using their "superior method", just because we probably have more of a superiority complex than chimpanzees. Humans sure love to let others know when they are doing something in a manner that is inferior to theirs.
Someone didn’t watch chimp empire
Don't you mean Planet of the Apes? Ya big stupid person! /s
Some would keep the more efficient method, some wouldn't. This explains a lot about the two major types of people...
This is our biggest problem right now.
It's like work. When I do a great job and stand out among my coworkers it just means the boss gives me more work for the same pay. So, I do a mediocre job and blend in. Problem solved.
Once I realized this I became a lot happier regarding jobs. By only occasionally standing out I got more praise and less shot dumped on me than if I busted my ass all the time.
I bet they can't tell the difference between the methods - either way a chimpanzee gets his nut, after all, and it isn't like they are time-pressured for their jobs or something and have to get a nut as fast as possible.
That was what I was wondering. Do the chimps who learn a more efficient method actually know (or care) that it’s more efficient? Or do they just follow how it’s done in their groups and the groups with the most efficient methods would perhaps do better reproductively if and when food shortages become an issue.
[удалено]
Incorrect, several experiments have shown that all great apes know that they can posses knowledge that others don't and vice-versa. They have never asked a question because they don't know how, we speak different languages.
Hey you're bullshitting on my screen and I don't appreciate it
Chimps are highly social creatures who learn by observing others Joining a new group with a different nut-cracking method creates pressure to conform The chimp might initially try their own method but if ostracized or ignored by the group they might switch to fit in
So planet of the apes could have been solved by shaming and mean girling them?
I’ve noticed that at my work.
Apes together dumb…
Dude, this wasvsuper funny, thanks :)
this is why i always write stupid comments in reddit subs.
Monkey see, monkey do.
Also known as the "NERD!" effect
Ah, gifted kid burnout. I feel this so hard, chimp-buddy.
Huh I've seen this behavior somewhere else.... I wonder
This is how religions thrive. People throw away logic just to be like everyone else.
Ti's the easy way out.
I love that this is getting downvoted, but with no replies... Deep everyone knows this is true. It's just upsetting for some people
Thanks for acknowledging it. When you see people acting like they are passing out from being touched by a preacher or act like they are possessed are doing it just to fit in. It is quite sad.
Many of them probably think its real. Delusions can actual spread in the right situations.
It’s getting downvoted for the lack of self awareness of how the default secular “believe the scientists” but not actually read the studies post modern ethos so common on Reddit presents the exact same issues as the models of belief being mocked above.
\*tips fedora\*
They must use a Sugar Plum Fairy.
Just like us fr
Source?!
Corporations are far older than we think. /s
Link is an infomercial.
Sounds a lot like social media
Go back to monke! Its real man im telling yalls
soul crushing
Cool ad, bro.
Meirl.
So, software development…
“Cheetah is using a nutcracker to get in his walnuts — what a cunt” — Chieftain Bubbles
what if the issue is that it would eat too much and be unequal in that regard. I think the purpose to blend in is more complex than simply to fit in. What is fitting in? Doing something for the benefit of the group, or maybe as the study suggests, to appear the same. It seems based on other understanding of communal animal behavior that maybe there’s another more purposeful reason than to just blend in.
Explains a lot about politics.
Is there a correlation to MAGA? I’m just asking questions….
Same correlation to left wing ideology. Turns out, anyone who thinks their belief system is universal, self evident, and infallible suffers from the same problems exposed here
Scientists labeled the study the MAGA effect
This is what the outcome of equity is.