Stupidity At Workplaces And Functional Stupidity In The Book “The Stupidity Paradox”
Table of Contents
An opening statement
Functional stupidity – its definition, consequences and role
The idea of decision-making, leadership and culture of organizations
What to do when you are stupid?
In conclusion
Here is a beginning
Mats alvesson and Andre Spicer are the authors of The Stupidity Paradox. Alvesson teaches at Lund University and is affiliated with the University of Queensland, Cass Business School and University of Queensland. Andre Spicer, professor of organizational behaviour at Cass Business School in London University is a fascinating book to read. This book is interesting because it explains how stupidity can affect the way an organization runs. Mats Alvesson, Andre Spicer and others have shared their experiences in order to show how companies hire intelligent people but make them do stupid stuff.
Their opinion is that organizations should cultivate conformity, obedience, and compliance rather than talent and reason. To engage the reader, they have illustrated their opinions with real-life examples. The book discusses how intelligent employees can be made stupid by smart companies, which can lead to long-term problems. The authors gave the example of the 2008 financial crises. According to this author, the financial crash was caused by’smart employees doing stupid work’ that produces short-term results but causes disasters long-term.
Functional Stupidity – The concept and its effectsAs Alvesson & Spicer emphasized, the phenomenon is a key factor that makes smart people purchase stupid ideas. This narrows the view and makes workers focus on only the technical side of an idea. They don’t consider the bigger picture. It will accomplish the task, but it will neglect the larger purpose of the job. Functional stupidity leads people to do what looks good. People are more concerned with getting the job done than they are about the outcome.
Irony is that these stupid ideas, which are often praised and encouraged by intelligent people with high educational and intellectual skills are usually done by people considered to have excellent leadership skills. According to the authors, organizations can promote functional stupidity if they create a culture focused on action. Employees are encouraged not to challenge problematic ideas and thoughts in order to make sure that processes run smoothly. Short-term ignoring of issues can cause long-term damage to organizations as they will be distrusted by stakeholders. It was explained that small issues can lead to major disasters over time.
The book has three sections. The book is divided into three parts. In the next part, we discuss five types of stupidity. The five types of stupidity are: leadership-induced stupidity; structure-induced dumbness; stupidity brought on by an unrestrained enthusiasm for brand and image; stupidity as the result of copying another organization and, finally, corporate culture-induced idiotic behavior. This book’s third section discusses different methods of managing stupidity in organizations.
The book clarifies the expectations of smart workers. Authors have used Peter Drucker’s idea to explain it in a way that keeps readers engaged. The book talks about an employee type called a ‘knowledge-worker’. Knowledge workers are expected to apply abstract knowledge to real-life situations and look for solutions. He will see a shift in the society, where real power lies in the control of information and not the production factors. A post industrial society was envisioned as one where knowledge workers use abstract concepts and models. Knowledge was to be the main resource. It was important to improve education and technology, as well as innovate. In reality, however, this did not happen. Workers expected to receive good grades with minimum effort. Researchers increased in number, but research papers’ key insights decreased.
The role of the technology was also addressed. Internet can be a great tool for a nation to become more knowledgeable, but on the other hand it can also lead people astray and give them an opportunity to waste their time with mindless activities. In the end, innovation has declined. The authors cite an American study where 2300 undergraduates from 29 colleges were tested at the beginning of their program, and after two years and four. After 2 years, 45% showed no improvement of cognitive abilities.
Authors have described the concept that a firm should be ‘knowledge-intensive’. They said that the goal is to create a feeling of community and attract clients. Knowledge workers are often unsure as to the current issues facing firms and how they can be addressed. IBM employees, for example, are more concerned with meeting their performance goals than they are about real innovation challenges. The focus is not on the worker’s knowledge but on their ability to demonstrate it. This leads them to miss opportunities for learning.
The book describes a few examples of workers who try to be intelligent but their actions only lead to stupidity. One of the stupid practices that authors discussed was turning a deaf ear to situations that are not positive. Workers ignore situations rather than looking for ways to improve conditions and why they didn’t succeed. The IQ of these workers is carefully considered, but their practical intelligence is not. Daniel and Amos’ study was cited by the authors to demonstrate the analytical and rational thinking abilities of workers. They proved that the initial data we receive shapes how we perceive the rest of the information.
Stupidity Paradox and the idea of Decision-making, Leadership and Culture of OrganizationsAlvesson and Spicer have analyzed the decision making style at these organizations. Workers are sometimes given the power to decide how they work, but they still choose to not work. It happens when people are more concerned with achieving satisfactory results than optimum ones. I was surprised to learn that stupidity in the workplace is not uncommon.
Ford Pinto is used to demonstrate that workers are often accustomed to following norms. They do not ask questions, avoiding potential issues. The reasons for this were also discussed. Asking questions can cause problems with co-workers or managers. The authors then explained the three main components of stupidity: justification, substantive reasoning and reflexivity. Absences in reflexivity result in a blind acceptance of what is generally believed and a refusal to question the assumptions.
Justification is a discussion of following rules without asking why. Inaction and bad decisions are often the result of a lack of solid reasoning. Functional stupidity happens when people don’t challenge the current work models or when they stop being curious. The lack of emotional reasoning can also lead to stupidity, because people are unwilling to consider or listen about potential flaws in their own work. Functional stupidity is also a result of moral beliefs that restrict the thinking patterns of employees.
It was an interesting line, as it suggested that organizations are prone to stupidity due to their misplaced obsession for leadership. The book contains a quote that I find particularly interesting: “By mindlessly buying into ideas of leadership, organizations can become overly committed to practices that don’t work.” It was a thought provoking line because it suggested the fact that organisations encourage stupidity due to their misplaced obsession with leadership. It limits people’s horizons and makes them do only specialized tasks and not look at the outcomes. Short-term it’s a good thing as it streamlines operations. But long-term it can be problematic.
The book discusses the impact of culture on people’s behavior and stupidity. Culture affects the way employees behave and how management acts. People are more likely to bond when they have a shared sense of identity and purpose. When an organization has a strong culture, people think in similar fashions without questioning norms or challenging them. It means there are no conflicts and the employees feel safe and comfortable. Nokia, which manufactures mobile phones, is used to illustrate the culture. The culture was dominated with optimism. The culture was dominated by optimism. Nokia was forced to take over the company by Microsoft because of this. A culture that encourages stupidity also involves the management’s focus only on the near and present future, while ignoring everything in between.
In the final and third part of this book, the authors provide ways to deal with and combat stupidity. It concludes that culture is a major factor in the rise of stupidity. It would cause disagreements and conflict between management and employees if you challenged industry norms, practices, strategies, procedures, structures, and ideas. This will lead to confusion, which will impact the decision-making process.
How to handle stupidity? Management uses a variety of techniques that promote stupidity. They include seductions, neutralizations, and opportunism. The manager’s position is used to give punishments or rewards. In the military, for example. Managers can seduce employees with attractive PowerPoint presentations or ideas. Managers can make employees believe that they have no other choices or alternatives for a particular job. Opportunism is when people don’t ask questions because their interests are discussed.
It is difficult to manage stupidity because employees will feel more confident and able to make better decisions if they follow the norms. But if they think freely, it will create disagreements. To rid organizations of stupidity is a costly endeavor. This could create conflict and uncertainty by encouraging a culture of questioning. It is possible to reduce the stupidity of a business by removing the positivity myth. This will prevent the company from focusing on the problems that it faces.
John Keats, a poet, describes this concept as ‘negative ability’. It is important that people are able to live with doubts, uncertainty and not be driven by facts or reason. It would allow employees to ask questions and think critically, as well as prepare arguments and take into account the broader implications of their decisions. One solution the authors emphasized was observing the situation as a critical-thinker, interpreting it and asking questions to get different perspectives. It is important to conduct a careful analysis and be open to new information. Interpretation is the process of gathering and evaluating other people’s perspectives on a situation. Although questioning may be uncomfortable, it can help to identify the true issues facing the organization.
ConclusionThis book can help readers improve their critical reasoning. The book has nine processes that will encourage readers to engage in reflection and thinking. Reflective rituals will encourage you to make a schedule of asking analytical and critical questions, such as Why and How. It is also helpful to have critics who can raise important issues. This person, also known as the devil’s Advocate, will have to question decisions that will tackle blind optimism. To avoid repeating the same mistakes, we must learn from our failures rather than hide them.
A new perspective can be brought into the organization by bringing in newcomers. Newcomers bring with them a fresh set of ideas and expertise. It is important to invite outsiders to an organization to see what they think about their practices. As critics are a great source of insight, focusing on their feedback can help to combat stupidity in organizations. The conclusion is that while functional stupidity might create harmony, it can also be used to deal with stupidity in organizations. Critics are a source of key insights and engaging them can result in advantages for the firm.
To avoid being stupid, it is important to observe, ask questions of reliable sources and make observations. The book encourages people to use their intelligence for themselves, their organizations and society. This book is a must-read for anyone who works in an organisation. It will give the reader a new perspective on the organization’s norms, and will also help him understand why companies encourage stupidity at work and how to deal with it.
