Archive

Ethics

Metacluelessness – The Competence Blind Spot Plaguing Organisations

March 10, 2024
Actionable Insights, Alien tech, Article, Business, Capability development, Ethics, Gullibility, Improvement, Management, Organisational effectiveness, Psychology, Quintessence, Teambuilding, Toxic behaviours
Leave a comment

Metacluelessness – The Competence Blind Spot Plaguing Organisations

The Danger of Overconfidence

As a manager, having confidence in your abilities is certainly important for leading teams and making critical business decisions. However, there is a fine line between self-assurance and falling victim to a dangerous cognitive bias called metacluelessness – a lack of awareness about the boundaries of your own competence.

Clifford’s Ethics of Belief

Philosopher William Kingdon Clifford highlighted the ethical importance of not allowing ourselves to remain in a state of false beliefs or delusions. In his essay “The Ethics of Belief,” Clifford argues it is wrong, whenever the occasion arises, to believe something on insufficient evidence. To do so is to erect a “scorner’s chair” for truth and to fail to uphold our fundamental duty as human beings to pursue truth diligently.

Metacluelessness as Unethical Delusion

Metacluelessness directly violates this duty that Clifford lays out. It causes managers to grossly overestimate their skills, knowledge, and overall managerial competence based on delusional confidence rather than objective assessment of the evidence of their understanding. Managers suffering from metacluelessness erect their own “scorner’s chairs” for truth in their areas of responsibility.

They think they have a solid handle on principles, best practices, people, psycvhology, emerging trends, and the complexities involved, when in reality there are gaping holes in their grasp that they fail to acknowledge. Suffering from metacluelessness, managers operate under a false sense of mastery over critical management disciplines. They are clueless about the true extent of their cluelessness and knowledge gaps. This creates disastrous blind spots in their judgment and decision-making.

The Root of Managerial Arrogance

As Clifford states, “The source of all the miserable self-idolatries…the despicable vices…is nothing other than a persuasion existing in men’s minds not based on fair reasoning and evidence.” Metacluelessness breeds overconfidence based on delusional beliefs about one’s true competence. It is the root of managerial arrogance, close-mindedness, dismissal of risks, and poor strategic vision.

Catastrophic Consequences

The consequences can be catastrophic – flawed strategies, missed opportunities, sunk costs from failures, poor leadership examples set for teams, and more. Entire companies have met their demise because executive leadership teams suffered from the “miserable self-idolatry” of individual and collective metacluelessness in critical areas.

Cultivating True Competence

Combating metacluelessness requires cultivating true competence – an awareness of what you don’t know and diligence in addressing those shortcomings. It starts with the intellectual humility that Clifford upheld as critical for a responsible pursuit of truth and knowledge. Admit the limits of your expertise without feeling inadequate. As Clifford wrote, “A generous admission of knowledge gaps is the condition of all real progress.”

The Best Never Stop Learning

Recognise that as a manager, you supervise teams filled with specialised knowledge you cannot possibly match in every domain. True competence means knowing when to rely on the wisdom of others with deeper mastery and looking for opportunities to expand your own understanding through fair reasoning and examination of evidence. It’s about embracing a habit of perpetual learning to strengthen beliefs in alignment with evidential proof.

The best managers never stop questioning their grasp of important principles and best practices based on the ethics of belief laid out by Clifford. Don’t let the “despicable vice” of overconfident metacluelessness derail your judgment through beliefs detached from rigorous evidentiary standards. Proactively identify and confront the boundaries of your competence. Only then can you become a more complete, ethically sound, and effective manager capable of leading teams and companies to success built on a foundation of diligently pursued truths.

Right or Popular?

October 10, 2023
Agile, Antimatter principle, Article, Ethics, Needs
Leave a comment

Right or Popular?

What Does “Right” Mean?

When we talk about being “right” in this context, we’re referring to a blend of factual accuracy and logical correctness. It means that your stance aligns with evidence and adheres to principles of logical reasoning. This isn’t about being morally right or wrong; rather, it’s about your position being defensible based on facts and rational arguments.

Why Aren’t Right and Popular Synonymous?

In an ideal scenario, what’s right should naturally be what’s popular. But we don’t live in such a simple reality. Public opinion often sways due to factors such as social influence, emotional appeal, or pre-existing biases. Popularity doesn’t put a premium on factual accuracy or logical validity. Often, a popular opinion gains traction not because it’s correct, but because it resonates with a significant number of people on a different level, be it emotional, ideological or commercial.

Can You Be Both?

Occasionally, yes, you can find yourself in the sweet spot where right meets popular. But increasingly, especially in polarised discussions—be they political, social, or even scientific—the two are mutually exclusive. The more divisive the topic, the more likely that standing on the side of logic and evidence will place you outside the mainstream. Increasingly, rigorous facts and deep insights have been overshadowed by sensationalism, crowd psychology and the might of Mammon.

What’s at Stake?

When right and popular part ways, there are consequences for both individuals and society. For individuals, it might mean less social acceptance or professional opportunities. On a societal level, the erosion of fact-based discourse can have serious implications, from the spread of misinformation to poorly-informed public policies.

How Do You Choose?

It’s a personal decision. If being correct is a core part of your identity and purpose, then there’s no question about which path to choose. However, if your role involves public influence or if your objective is to bring about change, the answer may not be so straightforward. Sometimes, a tactical compromise can serve a larger strategy, even if it means momentarily sidelining what’s right for what’s popular.

Conclusion

Being right and being popular are increasingly becoming mutually exclusive options. While it’s a dilemma that poses challenges both personally and socially, the choice ultimately lies in your hands. What you choose will depend on your needs, your values, and the context in which you find yourself.

Scrutinising Beliefs: Where Socrates Meets William Kingdon Clifford

August 30, 2023
Article, Business, Ethics, Improvement, Memeology, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Quintessence
Leave a comment

Scrutinising Beliefs: Where Socrates Meets William Kingdon Clifford

Ah, the age-old quest for knowledge, a journey that invites us to question not only the world around us but also the very fabric of our convictions. In this fascinating exploration, we’ll journey through the philosophic corridors where Socrates, the Athenian skeptic, crosses paths with William Kingdon Clifford, the Victorian ethicist. Brace yourselves for an intellectual romp that’s part epistemology, part ethics, and wholly engaging.

The Cornerstone: Socrates

Socrates, the man who turned Athens into his personal philosophy classroom, is a cornerstone figure in the study of epistemology. Despite never writing a single word himself, his methods and teachings have been immortalised through the accounts of his students, primarily Plato.

Socrates initiated what we know today as the Socratic method—a form of inquiry and debate that’s built on cross-examination. At its core is elenchus, a dialectical technique designed to unravel the assumptions that lie beneath our beliefs. The aim? To reach a clearer understanding of a concept or to unveil the flaws and contradictions in one’s own thinking.

Socrates was famous for his humility, encapsulated by the phrase, “I know that I am intelligent, because I know that I know nothing.” His relentless questioning set the benchmark for what qualifies as genuine knowledge. According to Socrates, beliefs must be able to withstand rigorous scrutiny to be considered knowledge. This sentiment aligns well with Clifford’s future claims, but we’ll get to that in a bit.

The Ethical Dimension: William Kingdon Clifford

Fast forward a couple of millennia to 19th-century Britain, and we meet William Kingdon Clifford, an intellectual powerhouse who added an ethical dimension to our understanding of belief. In his provocative essay, “The Ethics of Belief,” Clifford asserts, “It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.”

According to Clifford, our beliefs are not just personal convictions but ethical obligations. He argues that we have a moral duty to ensure our beliefs are well-grounded, as they guide our actions and shape our impact on society. Believing something without adequate evidence isn’t just intellectually lazy; it’s morally irresponsible.

Where Socrates and Clifford Intersect

What happens when you put Socrates’ relentless pursuit of truth alongside Clifford’s ethical framework? You get a compelling viewpoint: the quest for knowledge isn’t merely an intellectual endeavour but a moral one too. Both philosophers urge us to examine what underpins our convictions. While Socrates focuses on the method of questioning to unearth foundational truths or expose ignorance, Clifford insists that we have an ethical responsibility to do just that.

Both men add invaluable perspectives to the field of epistemology. Socrates kickstarted the conversation, stressing the importance of admitting one’s ignorance as a first step toward gaining true knowledge. Clifford took it a step further, infusing ethics into epistemology by emphasising the moral implications of our beliefs. In essence, it’s not enough to ‘just believe’; one must have sound reasons for those beliefs, grounded in careful thought and evidence.

Conclusion: The Ethics of Collective Assumptions and Beliefs in Organisations

Stepping away from ancient Athens and Victorian England, let’s bring this dialogue into the boardrooms and office corridors of today’s organisations. What happens when the scrutinising lens of Socratic inquiry and Cliffordian ethics is focused on the collective assumptions and beliefs that often go unexamined in corporate culture? The implications are profound.

Just as individuals have a moral and intellectual obligation to scrutinise their beliefs, so too do organisations when it comes to surfacing and reflecting on collective assumptions and beliefs. Whether it’s a company ethos, a mission statement, or the unwritten rules that govern interpersonal dynamics, these collective beliefs shape actions, decisions, and ultimately, the organisation’s impact on society.

In an organisational setting, failing to question and validate collective assumptions isn’t just a strategic misstep—it’s an ethical lapse. Unexamined beliefs can perpetuate inequality, stifle innovation, and even lead to large-scale ethical failures. These are not just abstract notions but real-world consequences that affect stakeholders, employees, and communities at large.

Just as Socrates and Clifford call for individual rigour in belief formation, their philosophies urge organisations to institutionalise a culture of questioning and ethical responsibility. By doing so, organisations not only elevate their ethical standing but also sharpen their strategic focus, rooted in beliefs that have been examined, challenged, and validated.

In a nutshell, scrutinising collective beliefs and assumptions in an organisation isn’t just good governance; it’s a moral imperative. The quest for organisational clarity and ethical conduct is a continuous process—one that requires us to ask tough questions and demand evidence for the answers we receive. When it comes to shaping an ethical and effective organisation, both the questioning and the answers are indispensable.

Idealism in Business

August 3, 2023
Antimatter principle, Article, Business, Community, Culture change, Doctrine, Ethics
Leave a comment

Idealism in Business

In the complex landscape of modern business, where profits often overshadow principles (and status overshadows profits), a philosophy grounded in ethics stands out as a guiding beacon. Ethical idealism, a concept that merges morality with business practice, is emerging as a pivotal approach that aligns companies with broader societal values. Let’s delve into this concept and explore how it can shape and benefit business.

What is Ethical Idealism?

Ethical idealism is the commitment to a set of moral principles or ideals that guide decisions and actions. In business, it means operating with integrity, fairness, and a consideration for ethical implications beyond mere profit. Ethical idealism is not about a utopian vision; rather, it’s a grounded approach that balances financial goals with moral responsibility.

Integrity and Trust

Businesses that adhere to ethical idealism build a reputation for integrity and trustworthiness. This reputation can lead to increased customer loyalty and a competitive advantage. When a company’s actions reflect its stated values, it resonates with consumers and creates lasting relationships.

Employee Satisfaction and Retention

An organisation that operates on ethical principles provides a working environment that fosters satisfaction and engagement. Employees who believe in the company’s mission and values are more likely to stay committed and contribute to the success of the organisation.

Long-Term Sustainability

Ethical idealism encourages companies to think beyond short-term personal advantage and immediate profits. By focusing on ethical considerations, companies can develop sustainable business practices that minimise harm and maximise positive impact on society and the environment.

Regulatory Compliance

A focus on ethics often goes hand-in-hand with compliance with laws and regulations. An ethical approach ensures that a company adheres to legal requirements, reducing the risk of legal issues that can harm the reputation and financial standing of a business.

Enhancing Stakeholder Relationships

Ethical idealism promotes transparency and openness with the Folks That Matter™, including investors, customers, suppliers, and the wider society. Clear communication about the company’s ethical stance fosters better relationships and collaboration, leading to synergistic benefits.

Conclusion

Ethical idealism is more than a philosophical stance; it’s a tangible strategy that can steer a business towards success. It aligns the pursuit of profit with a commitment to ethical values, building a brand that resonates with customers and creating an organisational culture that engages employees, and indeed all the Folks That Matter™.

In a world increasingly concerned with corporate responsibility and social impact, ethical idealism sets a company apart from competitors. It’s a pathway that leads to long-term success, fostering a business model resilient to the vicissitudes of chance and tuned to the evolving expectations of society.

Indeed, ethical idealism in business is not an obstacle to success but a catalyst, driving companies to operate with conscience and conviction. Those who embrace this approach may find themselves leading the way in a new era of business, where ethical considerations are not just an add-on but an integral part of the corporate identity and strategy.

“Doing the Right Thing” Seems to Have Become Rather Unfashionable Lately

August 1, 2023
Article, Ethics
Leave a comment

“Doing the Right Thing” Seems to Have Become Rather Unfashionable Lately

In the ever-evolving kaleidoscope of modern values, ethics, and social paradigms, we occasionally find that timeless virtues can seem out of fashion. Recently, it has become noticeable that the old adage of “doing the right thing” has started to slip from being a fundamental pillar of society to being perceived as something rather unfashionable. Why has this happened? How can we remedy this? Let’s explore.

The Shift in Perception

The concept of “doing the right thing” has been a cornerstone of many philosophical, religious, and cultural teachings. It’s a phrase imbued with a sense of moral correctness, ethical alignment, and virtuous behavior. Yet this simple yet profound principle seems to be taking a backseat.

The Rise of Relativism

With the rise of moral relativism, the very definition of what constitutes the “right thing” has become more fluid and subjective. While this has led to a more tolerant and diverse society, it has also given rise to confusion and a lack of consensus on universal values.

The Pressure to Succeed

In a world enamored with success, power, and material wealth, the pressure to attain these symbols of achievement often overshadows ethical considerations. As a result, principles such as honesty, integrity, and empathy can become compromised in the race to the top.

Social Media Influence and Optics

We igniore the influence of social media in this discussion at our peril. The relentless pursuit of “likes,” followers, and social validation has created a culture where appearance and superficiality often triumph over authenticity and moral substance.

The Consequences

The fading value of doing the right thing has repercussions on both an individual and societal level. Trust erodes, relationships suffer, and a sense of moral disintegration pervades.

Reviving the Virtue of Doing the Right Thing

So, how can we make doing the right thing fashionable again? Is doing so even a “right thing” any more? Here are a few ways:

Education and Dialogue

Fostering open conversations about ethics, virtues, and values in schools, workplaces, and communities can help to reestablish a shared understanding of what it means to do the right thing.

Leading by Example

Whether you are a parent, a manager, or a public figure, your actions carry weight. By embodying the principles of honesty, compassion, and integrity, you can inspire others to follow suit.

Celebrating Moral Courage

Rather than glorifying success at any cost, we might choose to start celebrating those who have the courage to stand up for what’s right, especially when it’s inconvenient or unpopular.

Building Supportive Communities

Creating environments that support and encourage ethical behavior will make doing the right thing not only acceptable but commendable.

Conclusion

Though “doing the right thing” may seem out of style, some hold that it remains an essential aspect of a healthy, thriving society. By recognising the importance of these timeless virtues and working collectively to promote them, we can help to rekindle a sense of moral purpose that transcends fleeting trends. After all, fashion changes, but principles endure. How about we make doing the right thing not only fashionable again but timeless.

In Favour of Wokeism at Work

February 14, 2023
Article, Community, Culture change, Ethics
Leave a comment

In Favour of Wokeism at Work

Wokeism has become a buzzword in recent years, and it refers to a movement that seeks to raise awareness about social justice issues, including racial, gender, and LGBTQ+ equality. In the workplace, wokeism means creating an inclusive and diverse environment that values all employees’ unique experiences and perspectives. Here are some reasons why embracing wokeism can benefit workplaces:

Firstly, wokeism promotes a workplace culture that is sensitive to different groups’ needs and experiences. This means creating an environment where people feel comfortable expressing their opinions and experiences without fear of discrimination or ridicule. When employees feel heard and valued, they are more likely to be productive, engaged, and committed to their work.

Secondly, embracing wokeism can help companies attract and retain talent from diverse backgrounds. In today’s globalized world, companies that embrace diversity and inclusion have a competitive advantage. Studies have shown that diverse teams are more innovative, creative, and effective at problem-solving. When companies promote a culture of inclusivity, they can attract talent from a wider pool of candidates, leading to a more dynamic and productive workforce.

Thirdly, wokeism can help companies avoid legal risks associated with discrimination and harassment. Discrimination and harassment in the workplace can lead to lawsuits, negative publicity, and damage to a company’s reputation. Embracing wokeism can help companies prevent these issues by promoting a culture of respect and inclusivity, which reduces the risk of legal liabilities.

Radiant Responsibility: Companies Shine with Ethical Standards and Radiant Transparency

February 1, 2023
Article, Culture change, Ethics, Honesty, Improvement, Trust
Leave a comment

Radiant Responsibility: Companies Shine with Ethical Standards and Radiant Transparency

In the vast and complex world of commerce and industry, there are a multitude of factors that contribute to a company’s success or failure. Of these, perhaps none is more important than a culture of transparency and accountability. And one of the most powerful tools in promoting this culture is the act of whistleblowing.

Whistleblowing refers to the act of reporting misconduct or illegal activity within an organisation to those who have the power and responsibility to take action. It is an act of courage that can be difficult for the whistleblower, but one that ultimately benefits both the company and its stakeholders.

At its core, whistleblowing is about promoting a culture of transparency and accountability within an organisation. When employees feel confident that they can report unethical or illegal behavior without fear of retribution, it sends a message that the company values honesty and integrity above all else.

The benefits of this kind of culture are numerous and far-reaching. For starters, it promotes a sense of trust and confidence among employees, which in turn can lead to increased morale and job satisfaction.

In addition, a culture of transparency and accountability also promotes ethical behavior within the company. Employees are less likely to engage in unethical or illegal behavior when they know that their peers are also acting ethically.

Furthermore, a culture of transparency can also have a positive impact on a company’s reputation. When employees feel confident that they can report unethical behavior without fear of retaliation, it sends a message that the company is committed to doing the right thing, even when it is difficult. This can help to improve the company’s standing in the eyes of its customers, shareholders, and other stakeholders, all of which can have a positive impact on the company’s bottom line.

Ultimately, the benefits of whistleblowing cannot be overstated. It is a critical component of a healthy and successful organisation, and one that can have a positive impact on a company’s bottom line in a number of ways. Whether it is improving morale, promoting ethical behavior, or building trust and confidence, the benefits of whistleblowing are clear and undeniable.

In conclusion, in the complex and ever-changing world of commerce and industry, the importance of a culture of transparency and accountability cannot be overstated. And among the many tools available for promoting this culture, whistleblowing stands out as one of the most powerful. By supporting employees in reporting unethical or illegal behavior without fear of retribution, it promotes a culture of trust, confidence, and respect, all of which can have a positive impact on a company’s bottom line. So let’s embrace the power of whistleblowing, and work together to build a brighter, more transparent future for all.

 

Factors of Top Performing Businesses

July 10, 2022
Article, Business, Culture change, Ethics, Honesty, Organisational effectiveness
Leave a comment

Factors of Top Performing Businesses

In order of biggest influence (biggest first):

  1. Luck.
  2. Graft a.k.a. criminality.
  3. Unethical practices.
  4. Rape of the planet.
  5. Friends in high places.
  6. Massive capital.
  7. Effective shared assumptions and beliefs.

Luck

Most entrepreneurs admit that their success is largely down to luck. Being in the right place at the right time, and so on.

Graft

Criminal enterprises such as Enron or Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities are widely known. Graft on relatively smaller scales is widespread as a business strategy or tactic.

Unethical practices

Unethical practices such as stealing from employees, explotation of employees or customers, rape of pension funds, unethical marketing practices, and so on are so widespread as to be common practice.

Rape of the planet

Many businesses inflate their profits through appropriation of natural resources (water, forests, carbon deposits, minerals, etc.).

Friends In high places

Favourable treatment by e.g. regulators or legislators can lead to increased profits, revenues, etc., if you know the right people from whom or via whom to secure such favours.

Massive Capital

Most companies with voluminous financial resources generally see little need to be effctive, despite their shrill exhortations and protestations.

Effective shared assumptions and beliefs

Way down at the bottom of my list is actually running the business effectively. Little wonder then that all the other options listed here seem much more common as strategies for “success”.

Most of the options listed here reside more or less outside the control of the businesses in question. Luck is rarely in the control of the protagonists. Graft risks prosecution and sanctions such as jail. Unethical practices risk alienating customers. Rape of the planet risks alienating society, more than ever nowadays. Friends in high places relies on having such friends, and avoiding scrutiny of such relationships.

Only the last option in the list confers some degree of integrity. But then when did integrity ever count for much in business?

– Bob

A Conducive System

May 31, 2022
Article, Capability development, Culture change, Ethics, Improvement, Management, Organisational effectiveness, Productivity, Quality, Quintessence, Systems thinking
Leave a comment

A Conducive System

[Tl;Dr: What are the system conditions that encourage ethical – and productive, effective – behaviours (Cf William Kingdon Clifford) in software delivery organisations?]

In yesterday’s blog post “The System Is Unethical” I related my experiences of how businesses – and the folks that run them and work in them – remain ignorant of just how ineffective they are at software delivery. And the consequences of that ignorance on e.g. costs, quality, customer satisfaction, etc

To recap: an unethical system perpetuates behaviours such as:

  • Failing to dig into the effectiveness of the organisation’s software delivery capabilities.
  • Indifference to the waste involved (wasted time, money, opportunities, human potential,…).
  • Ignorance of just how much more effective things could be, with e.g. a change in perspective.
  • Bravado and denial when questioned about such matters.

The Flip Side

Instead of the behaviours listed above, we might seek a system that encourages behaviours that include:

  • Continual attention to the effectiveness of the organisation’s software delivery capabilities.
  • Concern over the waste involved, and actions to reduce such waste.
  • Investigation into just how much more effective things could be.
  • Clarity and informed responses when questions about such matters.

Conducive System Conditions

So what might a system conducive to such behaviours look like?

That’s what my book “Quintessence” illustrates in detail. But in case you’re a busy person trapped in a non-conducive system, I’ve previously written about some of the key aspects of a conducive system, here:

Quintessence For Busy People

BTW I’m always happy to respond to your questions.

– Bob

 

 

 

 

The System Is Unethical

May 30, 2022
Article, Capability development, Culture change, Ethics, Improvement, Leadership, Memeology, Organisational effectiveness, Organisational Therapy, Quintessence
Leave a comment

The System Is Unethical

Or at least, it’s “the system” that sits at the root of the unethical behaviours costing software delivery organisations £££millions annually. And it’s the culture of an organisation that defines that system.

Many years ago I wrote a White Paper titled “All Executives Are Unethical”. This paper riffed on a theme from Seth Godin – “All Marketers are Liars”. And channeled the ethical arguments of William Kingdon Clifford:

…whatever someone chooses to believe cannot be exempt from the ethical judgement of others.

In the aforementioned White Paper, I spoke of the ethics of executives, and in particular the folks that make the decisions about committing to improvements (or maintaining the status quo) in software delivery.

It’s been my experience over the course of thirty-plus years, that said executives act as if they believe their software delivery capability has little need, or scope, for improvement. Acting as if investing in improving said capability has little to no payback, and little to no impact on the organisation’ top line or bottom line.

It’s The System

Bill Deming famously wrote:

The fact is that the system that people work in and the interaction with people may account for 90 or 95 percent of performance.

~ W.E. Deming quoted in Scholtes, PR 1998 ‘The leader’s handbook: making things happen, getting things done’ McGraw-Hill, London p 296

Some readers of my aforementioned White Paper may have inferred I was criticising individual executives for their shortfall in ethics. Not at all. These folks work in “systems” as much as everyone else. It’s the system that drives their behaviours. Behaviours such as:

  • Failing to dig into the effectiveness of their organisation’s software delivery capabilities.
  • Indifference to the waste involved (wasted time, money, opportunities, human potential,…).
  • Ignorance of just how much more effective things could be, with e.g. a change in perspective.
  • Bravado and denial when questioned about such matters.

And it’s not limited to executives. Most advisors and practitioners (coaches, developers, middle managers, etc.) are equally ignorant, indifferent, flippant and slow to inquire.

Organisational Psychotherapy – and in particular, Memeology – offers a means to being addressing the shortcomings of the system, and thus bring about changes in folks’ behaviours.

– Bob

Further Reading

Marshall, R.W. (2021). All Agilists Are Unethical. [online] Think Different. Available at: /2021/12/23/all-agilists-are-unethical/ [Accessed 30 May 2022].
Seddon, J. (2015). 95% of Performance Is Governed By The System. [online] Vanguard Consulting Ltd. Available at: https://beyondcommandandcontrol.com/library/dr-demings-aphorisms/95-of-performance-is-governed-by-the-system/ [Accessed 30 May 2022].

All Agilists Are Unethical

December 23, 2021
Agile, Article, Capability development, Culture change, Ethics, Improvement, Quintessence
Leave a comment

All Agilists are Unethical

Are all Agilists unethical? This post argues that, absent objective evidence, it’s simply unethical for Agilists to claim that product and software development in the Agile fashion is reasonably effective.

The Ethics of Belief

London, April 11, 1876. There is uproar in the House. But this is not the House of Commons, rather the Grosvenor Hotel, and the furore is not political but – more unusually perhaps – philosophical.

William Kingdon Clifford – then professor of mathematics and mechanics at University College London – and the youngest ever person to be accepted into London’s elite Metaphysical Society, is presenting his inaugural paper. His audience includes the likes of Alfred Tennyson, William Gladstone, Thomas Huxley and the cream of London’s intelligentsia. The title of his paper is “The Ethics of Belief”.

Even before he finishes his reading, half the audience have stormed out of the room in protest. The remainder are on their feet, heartily engaged either in shouting him down or cheering him on.

What did the audience find so contentious about Clifford’s proposition? In his essay, he asserts that whatever someone chooses to believe cannot be exempt from the ethical judgement of others. A belief may leave someone open to a charge of unethical behaviour, depending on whether they have earned “the right to believe it”.

Ethics In the Development of Software-intensive Products and Services

London, December 2021. Waves of covid infections crash upon the bulwarks of the World’s healthcare systems. Ordinary people in all walks of life look upon the excesses of governments and businesses in a new, and distinctly unflattering light. What has happened to the traditional values of probity, social responsibility, ethics? Good questions indeed. In many quarters, scientists and specialists are regarded as pariahs.

Of course, recent events have only served to propel these issues into the public eye. In many avenues – and over many years – complacency, self-interest and greed seem to have overturned diligence, responsibility and probity. I believe we could all benefit from taking a long hard look at what we have become.

My own focus of concern is the arena of software and product development. I have seen literally hundreds of organisations in the business of developing software-intensive products and services in the course of my career. Most of these businesses have been wasting enormous amounts of time, money, effort, and human potential, through their unwittingly inefficient approaches to the practice of software development.

“…whatever someone chooses to believe cannot be exempt from the ethical judgement of others.”

And in most cases, little or nothing of any effective, practical value is done to address the situation, or if done, then not sustained.

In my experience this almost always comes about because those advising people nominally responsible for the situation – the senior executives of a company – honestly believe that Agile development approaches are effective (even though that rarely seems good enough).

So here’s the rub:

Do Agilists have the right to believe – and proselytise – that their approach(es) are as productive as possible, even if they have not gathered and considered the evidence?

Is such a belief, even when sincerely held, justifiable when these Agilists have acquired his or her belief…

“…not by honestly earning it in patient investigation but rather by stifling his doubts? And although in the end he may have felt so sure about it that he could not think otherwise, yet inasmuch as he had knowingly and willing worked himself into that frame of mind, he must be held responsible for it.”

But what if disaster (or merely loss of profit) does not befall the an Agile transformation or project? Would the Agilist be any less guilty?

“Not one jot. When any action is once done. it is right or wrong, forever; no accidental failure of its good or evil fruits can possibly alter that. The man would not have been innocent, he would only have been not found out. The question of right or wrong has to do with the origin of his belief, not the matter of it; not what it was, but how he got it; not whether it turned out to be true or false, but whether he had a right to believe on such evidence as was before him.”

Prior to Clifford, the established intelligentsia presumed that beliefs could never be examined in an ethical light. A gentleman could believe any damn thing he pleased.

Until recently, it seemed as if that presumption still held sway in many organisations. But today, William Clifford’s question comes back to haunt us. Yes, Agilists may truly believe that people working in an Agile way are being as productive as possible – but do they have any right to believe it?

About the Author

My name is Bob Marshall and I’ve been a specialist in the transformation of organisational performance – particularly in the software development and business technology arenas – for the past forty years and more.

I became interested in the field in the first place because of the egregious waste of time, money, effort and – above all – human potential that I saw time and again in organisations trying to develop software-intensive systems and products. So many people have such a poor time at work, frustrated and unfulfilled every day, in the majority of “Agile” (and other) organisations out there.

And the main reason for all this misery and waste? A simple belief that the Agile approach is beneficial. Or at least, not amenable to further improvement. Such a belief seems widespread, particularly amongst long-standing Agilists.

This distribution suggests that most software personnel have never seen software development at its best (or even, good). Their unfamiliarity with effective practice gives rise to a natural scepticism about whether things are really any better anywhere. Even people who have worked in the software industry for twenty or thirty years might never have seen software development practices anywhere near their best.

Most people will have spent their entire careers working in under-performing organisations. But some lucky few have seen for themselves that Quintessential organisations are indeed much more effective than the rest.

The Ethical and Moral Imperative

How do you feel about people wasting their time? I’m talking here specifically about the waste of effort, time and resources during the working day. There’s the obvious economic cost, of course. If employees are wasting time, by definition that’s costing their employer money. In software development, both the waste – and the cost – are often significant, but rarely visible.

However, I’m not going to dwell on this aspect in this article. Instead I want to talk about the morality of waste. Or rather, the immorality of it all.

We’ve already seen how Clifford caused uproar amongst his peers by suggesting that belief is subject to ethical scrutiny. And I’ve suggested that most Agilists’ belief that things are OK within their clients’ or employers’ software development shops fails that ethical test.

But I feel it goes further than that. Not only is Agilists’ naïve belief in the productivity of their clients’ or employers’ workforce unethical in itself, but the consequences – for individuals, the client organisations and wider society – are immoral too: waste, misery, stress, friction, conflict, disrespect, under-achievement, despondency, profligacy, demoralisation and frustration, to name but a few.

The Ethical Way Forward

So what to do? First, even before looking at the reality of the situation, on the ground, in their own organisations, I would invite responsible Agilists take a look at themselves – and their own motivations and culpability. Have they “honestly earned the right to their belief through patient investigation” – or are they merely “stifling their doubts”?

Have Agilists “honestly earned the right to their belief through patient investigation” – or are they merely “stifling their doubts”?

If the latter, then I suggest Agilists are ethically bound to go look for themselves at the reality of the situation in their clients’ or employers’ organisations. Some may feel uncomfortable doing this, lacking the necessary skills, access, or even simply the time. This need be no bar, however. Various specialist organisations exist to offer the necessary intervention, audit and review services. These organisations can conduct Clifford’s “patient investigations” and furnish the objective evidence.

Having the necessary evidence in mind, executives may then take pride that their beliefs pass the ethical test.

Of course, having real evidence to hand will likely show that the client has much scope for improvement, improvements which dwarf the proposed benefits of “going Agile”.

And finally, Agilists with a new-found or renewed ethical sentiment may begin to examine their peers’ beliefs in an ethical light, too. Thus, ethical business, and a more ethical society at large, grows stronger. Or is that too much to hope for?

In closing, I leave you with the words of Bertrand Russell:

“What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is its exact opposite.“

– Bob

How Much Do You Care?

September 3, 2021
Article, Caring, Community, Compassion, Culture change, Ethics, Improvement, Nonviolent Communication, NoSoftware, Organisational effectiveness, Software development
Leave a comment

How Much Do You Care?

In recent times I have noted an upswing in the frequency of conversations about the ethical dimension of software development. Although still early days, many aspects of the social implications of software are beginning to receive more attention.

Effective Software Development

The dog’s breakfast that is Agile in the real world today exemplifies, for me, a key aspect of these ethical questions. Not that ethical questions are at all limited to the software industry.

What am I talking about? I’m talking about how people with a clear understanding of e.g. Agile software development (yes, there are some) tolerate, even support, a pallid, ineffective version in their workplace because their jobs and livelihoods depend on not rocking the boat. I’m talking about how folks go along with an ineffective and crippled approach for an easy life. Although how easy is it to stand by and watch project after project fail or limp along, with the consequent frustration and angst for all concerned?

With the oft-reported woefully low levels of employee engagement in most organisations, it’s hardly surprising that people just let such things slide by with little or no comment, complaint or action.

Satyagraha

We might take a leaf out of Gandhi’s nonviolent campaign playbook. He placed the idea of satyagraha at the heart of his toolkit of civil resistance. What is satyagraha? Online references describe it as “truth-force” or “the force that is generated through adherence to truth”.

Note: In this context, I choose to regard “truth” as referring to ethical imperatives such as justice, fairness and righteousness, and not simply factual truth. And yes, everyone has their own “truths” a.k.a. assumptions and beliefs. As do groups, such as organisations.

At the core of satyagraha is the willingness to suffer for the truth. Spiritual, emotional and physical suffering, borne in public, serves to emphasise the degree to which the satyagrahi care about the issue upon which they are campaigning.

Do You Care Enough to Suffer?

In the case of Agile, as with other aspects of how organisations run themselves today, it’s fair for folks to ask:

“Is it any of my concern? Don’t senior people with much higher pay grades than me hold the responsibility for these things?”

How is this any different from the old defence “I was only following orders?” 

Do you care? Do you care enough to start to say “No.”? In a civil and polite way, of course.

Are you prepared to suffer to see things become better for all concerned?

– Bob

Let’s be Honest

August 20, 2021
Article, Culture change, Ethics, Honesty
5 Comments

Let’s be Honest

Let’s be honest, honesty seems in pretty short supply in life, and especially in business. 

Let’s be honest…

  • It’s dangerous to speak one’s mind honestly.
  • Most folks are more interested in holding down a job than in being honest about what’s going on.
  • Being honest feels good, but has far more negative consequences than positive ones.
  • The more senior the person, the more lip-service is paid to honesty.
  • How often do you feel it necessary to hide what you’re doing, rather than honestly declaiming your actions?
  • The smarter folks are, the more acute their capacity for self-deception.
  • Character (as in “good character”) is lauded in public and ridiculed in private.
  • You’re not going to risk commenting on this post, lest someone influential sees your honest opinon.

– Bob

Further Reading

Radical Candor ~ Kim Scott

Two Suits, No Hoots

July 20, 2021
Culture change, Ethics, Leadership, Management
Leave a comment

Two Suits, No Hoots

Two suits stood in the aisle of the busy open-plan office.

“These people really are dumb,” John said, “even whisper ‘the bottom line’ and they all jump to it.”

“Yup. No one realises that us managers are in it for ourselves, not the bottom line,” Ralph said.

John smiled. “Sure thing. Wouldn’t do to have them find out, though.”

“No problem. They’ve been so brainwashed by life that even if we shouted our self-interest, they’d not believe it.”

John raised his thumb. “Safe, then.”

Ralph grinned.

Where’s the flaw in John and Ralph’s assumptions and beliefs?

– Bob

Further Reading

Your REAL Job ~ Think Different blog post