The Importance of Policy - Overcoming Personalities in a Flat Organization

On 2/9/14 I posted "The Importance of Policy" and promised at the end that I would follow up with some ideas on enforcing policy within a flat organization. To recap, the original question was basically this - If you are reviewing someone's project and find that they are not following policy, inform them of the offense, and they refuse to comply what do you do? Let's start with tackling this domestically. The first thing to look at is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs; physiological needs, safety needs, love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization. In it Abraham Maslow describes people as needing to be accepted and respected. How this occurs in a business environment is bureaucratic. In other words, the most important acceptance for the individual comes from his or her management chain. Maslow also describes a need for safety which encompasses work. In other words, nobody wants to lose their job and as such should be willing to comply if approached in the correct manner. Esteem and Self-Actualization are also key parts in Maslow's hierarchy which could be related. Encountering someone with low self-esteem may give the person making an argument the upper hand, if in fact the arguer has a higher self-esteem. Self-Actualization encompasses understanding the situation, making decisions, being moral and ethical, problem solving, and objectivity. This is an example of someone reaching their full potential. Maslow's biggest criticism is not being worldly. It is heavily weighted in domestic research. So what do we do in a global situation? The answer is simple. Look toward a global model, Max Neef's Fundamental Human Needs. The same ideas as listed above apply, although they are classified differently in this model and are not considered a hierarchy. The biggest difference for application here is how those needs are satisfied. Being able to answer this question for each need makes this model cross-cultural. Juan Antonio Perez Lopez' "Organizational theory: A cybernetical approach" may have some answers for motivations and interactions.



The above may help, but there are also more general approaches.  You can learn a lot about a  person by how they dress, observing their mannerisms, body language, interactions with others, and many more character traits.


Another avenue worth pursuing is personality mirroring; becoming more like the subject for the time it takes to convince them.  This is especially effective because people usually like themselves, and if you can be like them, even if only for a period of time, they are more willing to like, accept, and listen to you.  I have personally found this to be ineffective if the person you are doing this to has any amount of intelligence.


It seems that we are always looking for some form of utilitarian aspect of our professional relationships.  What can you do for me?  Sometimes we should also ask, "What can I do for you?".  Often times, we lose our audience by pushing our own agenda so strongly that we completely turn off the listener.  Sometimes simply listening, showing empathy, or being compassionate may be all it takes to win someone over.  Additionally, if you listen hard enough, you may find gaps, points, or other ammunition with which to craft in support of your argument.


Once you understand the person, then you can decide how to deal with them.  Just like hacking, manipulation of the mind stems from knowing and researching your subject, classifying them, identifying their weaknesses, and attempting to exploit them.  It also helps to be good at debating things and articulating points well.  What makes this fun is that you yourself are the threat agent in this analogy, and if you are good you can be metamorphic.


I found this article that I felt was interesting. I'm not sure where it really fits into this writing, so I'm just going to drop a bomb right here.  Check it out!


Finally, I'll throw out this suggestion.  Sometimes we ask ourselves how to make someone do something.  If you cannot manipulate them that way, take the questions inverse and ask why isn't someone doing something?  If you can identify those reasons, maybe you can eliminate them.