Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

156221Re: [XP] Becoming rational about Irrationality

Expand Messages
  • Tim Ottinger
    Dec 13, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      #2 might be true, if you accept that our notions of pain and pleasure are not
      well-defined and rational, but based on precedence. I might avoid following your
      advice if you look like someone who has mistreated me in the past, as early as
      kindergarten or before. I might see your plan as good because you remind me of
      my grandmother, who gave me cookies. Since human precedence is not rational but
      historical, social, etc, it is impossible to predict it in a stranger and nearly
      so in a friend or relative.

      Also, to some delaying pain is avoidance and to others it is not. Again, not
      rational. Avoiding confrontation with someone who reminds me of Mr. Simms in 3rd
      grade might seem like minimizing pain (for now). Lots of weird effects come into
      play. Easy to just call it 'irrational' (as such it is) and live on.

      Tim Ottinger

      ----- Original Message ----
      > From: PAUL <beckfordp@...>
      > To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 3:28:57 AM
      > Subject: [XP] Becoming rational about Irrationality
      > Hi All,
      > I have come to accept that three widely held assumptions about organisations
      >are in fact false:
      > 1. The assumption of order: that there are underlying
      > relationships between cause and effect in human interactions
      > and markets, which are capable of discovery
      > and empirical verification.
      > 2. The assumption of rational choice: that faced with a
      > choice between one or more alternatives, human ac-
      > tors will make a "rational" decision based only on
      > minimizing pain or maximizing pleasure; and, in consequence,
      > their individual and collective behavior can
      > be managed by manipulation of pain or pleasure outcomes
      > and through education to make those consequences
      > evident.
      > 3.The assumption of intentional capability: that the acquisition
      > of capability indicates an intention to use
      > that capability, and that actions from competitors,
      > populations, nation states, communities, or whatever
      > collective identity is under consideration are the result
      > of intentional behavior. In effect, we assume that
      > every "blink" we see is a "wink," and act accordingly.
      > We accept that we do things by accident, but assume
      > that others do things deliberately.
      > http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~brooks/storybiz/kurtz.pdf
      > Once you accept these assumptions are false, it becomes easier to reason about
      >irrational behaviour. In this light the current adoption curve of Agile
      >practices is totally rational and all that is needed is patience.
      > It took Toyota over 40 years to become great at car manufacturing, why should
      >we expect an whole industry with prior vested interests to re-invent itself in
      >just 10 years?
      > Perhaps all we need to do is keep our message simple and consistent and just
      >be patient?
      > Regards,
      > Paul.
      > ------------------------------------
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.comYahoo! Groups Links
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic