“….break’s over, back to work” the Wakefield Doctrine (the first step for some people, is to take a test that tells them something that they already know)

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)


Same format as Monday. A (reprint) Post for the New and/or Casual Reader and (below that) the current list of questions, answers and scenaria.

(…Doctrine on the move! This just in: we have Christine promising a ton ‘o scenario, Considerer totally ….er excited about the…enhancement of her first questions. We have three more, they will be showing up real soon…also Michelle checked in and she is all over the scenario thing, Cyndi let us know that she is de-canting a case of positively captivating questions and answers! Fun? Here?  yeah, sure! of course!)

The goal is to present our Readers with 15 familiar, interesting and intriguing life situations. The Reader is asked to choose from three responses/reactions to the situation. At the end of the Test, all they have to do is add up their score and they will know which, (of the three) is their predominant worldview. With this knowledge they might then have the insight to know that they might be:

  • An Outsider? (that would be a clark…born to see the world and all the people as separate, familiar but un-related, as being ‘out there’ external to where they are) or
  • maybe a Predator (scott!! born alert… always on the prowl, literary, figuratively, sexually and constantly resting only when tired finding excitement anywhere they can find it or cause it among the people they meet, who are, in turn stronger Predators …or prey… or clarks) Hey! you might be one of them or
  • if the score indicates (and if it is a score, then it must reflect the truth!) our Reader may confirm what they probably already knew, they are a Member of the Herd (a roger is a person who lives in the world where things add up, everything is accounted for, surprises are for the lazy and everyone belongs…except for some people and except, of course, for those very pushy, hyper-active but somehow attractive and sexy predator people, and them! they are so easy to control!)

So for our Guests, following is a Post that saw the light of day back on January 18, 2011:

 If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true. (Pedro)

At the very real risk of compounding a series of bad (editorial) choices, I am leaving the following to “run” as today’s Post. There were a number of technical difficulties associated with it that normally would have had me throwing the whole thing on the ground and starting over, but I liked the video and couldn’t stand to part with it (Post-wise).

In any event, if you are a New Reader?  better get used to it. There is a universe full of entertaining, informative, well written blogs available at the mere click of a mouse, and there is the Wakefield Doctrine.

Now that I see the words in ‘print’ I just had another satoristic  moment, a new appreciation of this thing of ours!
I’ll bet you that on a good percentage of the Posts that get published, this place looks like a scott’s house/apt.  Bear with me here, I know what I mean to say, not sure how to put it. I’m talking about the ‘tone’ or style, maybe of these Posts; I am thinking that some of them will be kinda scottian. No one element that I can point to, a certain frenetic quality, impulsive un-orderly way of attempting to make a point. That is not to say that scotts are not good housekeepers, (they are not, rogers are the good housekeepers), and not that scotts aren’t the most likely to be taken by curiosity, (they do have a streak of curiosity but it is clarks that are the eclectic of the three). But if you were to go into a scott’s house/room/workshop/library, you would find a really odd bunch of things. Nothing that would betray a need to be orderly, a lot of broken instruments, tons of magazines and not a few half-eaten sandwiches on plates at work benches (… you know a scott was working and eating and then something else caught their attention and BAM out the door). This is the den of a scott, eclectic without a need to preserve, variety without the drive to catalogue.

But I was starting to say, it just struck me that taken as a collection, these Posts are beginning to reflect, at varying times a clarklike consideration, a scottian impulsiveness and a rogerian formality!

Damn, maybe this frickin Doctrine is starting to work!
In any event, below is the ‘original’ Post for today.  ……see ya

Everyone knows the story of how the theory of clarksscotts and rogers came to be known as the Wakefield Doctrine, right?  ( your monitor gets wavy, you come back into focus in…in  Hollywood?)


Clark and Glenn are in animated discussion, it is clear that the topic is one they are both very, very familiar with and they are covering old ground


Blah, blah blah…I know and you know and I know that the theory is valid and way, way more useful than most of the crap that you use for your trainings. When are you gonna incorporate it into one of your modules?


Hey, I know its useful! I been in this car listening to you for the last 15 years, haven’t I?


So what’s it gonna take to do something with this thing…what do you need to take it on the road? Hell, I know you’re already stealing parts of it to use in your presentations


Credibility. Thats what it needs…If I go out there in front of my Board of Directors and say, “…and this new module is based on ‘the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers’ they will laugh.”


Yeah, but…it works… it is useful…


And it sounds like it came out of a dorm room…from the 70s. I work in a corporate environment…credibility, empirical…metrics…you hearin this?


I get it, I get it…fine! then I’ll change the name…you want credibility?…from now on the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers is…the…Doctrine, the Wakefield Doctrine!


Fuckin yeah!

Now the work:

1)  You’re in class one Friday afternoon in October. You are in the middle of the quarterly exam and you are glad you were prepared for the test. You look over and notice that  your best friend is looking at another persons exam answers, you immediately look away but then you notice your Teacher is about to catch your friend cheating. You immediately:

     a) stand up and ask to be excused to go to the bathroom;
     b) start laughing in a very loud voice or
     c) do nothing, you need an ‘A’ on this test or you won’t get in to Medical School


2) You’re out on a double date with your best friend. While sitting at the table,waiting for the band to come on stage, you notice that, when they don’t think anyone is looking, your friend’s date is flirting with your date. Will you:

     a) take your friend aside and tell them what you suspect and offer your support;
     b) take your friend’s date aside and tell them that if they keep it up you will kick their ass or
     c) feel embarrassed for your friend and don’t do anything, except when you over-compensate you end up looking like you’re flirting with your friends date…


3) (from Friend of the Doctrine,  Christine): ( True story).    Scenario: Sitting in a “restaurant” (Step above fast food. Order at counter, but some workers roaming the place asking if you want refills or more breadsticks.) alone, you notice some thug-looking teenagers taking turns stealing tips off of tables. What do you do?

     a) stand up and tell them to put all the stolen money back;
     b) tell the counter person that, while you might not be 100% certain, you are pretty sure there are people in the restaurant stealing tips or
     c) call 911 on your cell phone (speed dial) and return to enjoying your meal

Lets add some more questions, new from our Contributors and from our original set.

4)  (from DownSpring Considerer... here is one of 4 that she was kind enough to send us and is “… heavily edited” ): You’re at home waiting for a telephone call. Your favourite relative, who you haven’t seen in years, is coming to visit and promised to call as soon as they got into town, for final directions to your house. The phone rings, so rather than let it go to the answering machine, you pick it up and say, “hi’. The telemarketer seems delighted to hear an actual person’s voice and immediately launches into their pitch, “Hi! Am I speaking to the member of the household who makes the decisions about how happy your family will be?”

     a) Listen politely to the spiel until you have a moment to interject, at which time you explain that you don’t want to buy into their service and try to negotiate the conversation to a swift end.
     b) Leave the phone off the hook, and walk away, coming back five minutes later to hang up if they’ve stopped talking by then…remember that you are waiting for a call, get angry and, without picking it up, shout at the phone   (“Can’t you see I’m waiting for someone?”).
     c) Start swearing at them, notice that the telemarketer is still on the line and seems to be getting upset…stay on line asking personal questions about their family, savouring the outrage you sense when you suggest they engage in an anatomically impossible sex act…hang up, laughing


5) You’re in a Supermarket checkout aisle; there is one person ahead of you and two behind you in line. It’s late on a weekday afternoon, people are all getting their mid-week grocery shopping done. While you are focused on the magazine rack opposite the checkout counter ( One newspaper is stating, ‘Obama and Rhianna are siblings born on the Planet Osiris’),  another shopper ‘cuts in line’ in front of you.  You:

     a) Look to see if anyone else in line noticed. Try to figure out why someone would be so rude and whether you should confront them or maybe tell the person behind you that the line will be delayed and aren’t people rude these days…
     b) Tap the offending shopper on the shoulder, tell them (nicely) that there are people in line and ask them, do they understand the normal protocol of lines? You say this with a smile and a genuine sense of wanting to help the person understand how they should behave in a checkout line.
     c) Establish eye contact and smile and shake your head in a ‘no, don’t do that’ gesture. (if the person is an attractive member of the opposite gender, make them stand immediately ahead of you in line).


6) You’re out for dinner with your spouse and another couple. The restaurant is new and very popular, so popular that there is normally  a 3 month wait for reservations. But you have a client who has connections and you were able to get in with very little delay, much to the impressed delight of your spouse and your friends. The dinner is all that you hoped it would be, outstanding cuisine and everything perfect and then as the server is pouring your coffee at desert they are jostled by a passing customer and spill coffee in your lap. You:

     a) scream loudly (if female)…shout loudly (if not) look around the table and the nearby tables and decide whether to play it for laughs or simply the fun of making the server cry (if female) get mad and storm off (if not)
     b) apologize to the server while trying to determine who might be to blame. Failing that, consider the possibility that either the server simply made a mistake or has a flawed personality
     c) feel embarrassed…feel like people are staring…apologize to the nearest person  …hate yourself for ruining the server’s evening (Optional)


7) You’re alone in your car, driving home late at night and you notice an SUV in the woods by the side of the road, it’s emergency flashers are on, steam is billowing from under the hood, clearly it has run off the road. You immediately:

     a) Pull over, get out of your car (hopefully remembering to put it in ‘Park’) and run towards the car shouting “Hey! Is everyone alright in there”
     b) Slow down and watch your rearview mirror until you see someone else pulling over, then speed up so that you can get to where the cell phone reception is strongest so that you can call for back-up
     c) Look to see if you recognize the vehicle, when you see that it has out-of-state plates, look at your watch then pull over and get out of your car, but stay where you are parked so that you can wave down the passing cars, ignore the screams for help and try to decide if the Good Samaritan laws apply to engineers

8) You are at the Wildlife Park (a local family attraction), you notice a small boy kicking up a fuss, he appears lost and is clearly getting increasingly distressed, all at once he begins screaming for his Dad and looking around frantically. Do you:

     a) Watch him from a distance, pleased as other people step in to try to help the little chap.
     b) Walk up to him, put your hand on his shoulder, look him in the eye and reassure him that you’ll help him find his father, simultaneously scoping the area for a member of staff to tell that there’s a lost child.
     c) Join in with the crowd of other people saying nice (but largely ineffective) things as he zig-zags past you all.

Sitting in the waiting room of the urgent care center.

8) You’ve been there for 3 hours, there were two rows of waiting patients when you arrived, that was reduced to half the number (of waiting patients) but now you (still sitting there) detect a noticeable increase in the number of people coming into the waiting room. You:



clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one


  1. Considerer says:

    Better late than never – I’ll ping you an email.

    Test’s looking good so far

    But only 15?

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


      Still in ‘proof of concept’ if these few questions are sufficiently interesting/fun/engaging to Readers, then I will come up with more and then use a test widget to see what kind of constancy there is in the responses of Readers. In other words, if they have enough fun taking the test, I will then be able to test to see if it actually works!

  2. This Wakefield Doctrine? Yes, it fucking “works”. Which is to say, I can’t discredit it. Not that I’ve tried. (‘cuz I’m a clark = always open to the new and different and can consider anything as possible) I’ve had it demonstrated over and over and over again.
    The most important thing I’ve taken from it? That it’s for me, not for them. “It’s a tool, not an answer”. Having just said that… watching it manifest in real life surely does provide some answers.

    I said I would contribute some test questions. I don’t have them yet. I don’t know how long you’ll wait for them but since you know me to be a clark….you’re not holding your breath LOL …. you know, for me to write the “perfect” question.

    ‘S all for today.

  3. christine says:

    The one from Considerer is a great question. A little harsh/overly involved with the (I assume) scott response, though? This scott would simply hang up.
    I am way too into this test thing. I’m coming up with scenarios all day long. One of my favorite classes in college was a test-writing class, and once I became a teacher, I had way too much fun coming up with tests for my students.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


      glad to hear that (about enjoying this ‘project’) this will so be more than it would have been (otherwise).

      Having said that, there are some things we (you, Michelle, Denise, Lizzi and others) will need to discuss as far as ‘shaping’ the questions.*
      Two main areas: the involvement factor (how fun and interesting and engaging the scenario are) and (even more critical) how well do the ‘Answers’ resonate with the targeted worldview? That last, might address the ‘harshness’ of the answer (which I shifted Lizzi’s version a little)… keep in mind, all scotts (as all clarks and rogers) have differing levels of worldview etc (here is where I will suggest a common chat session or vid brunch (at a convenient time)…so that we can pool our brains (‘eww!’).
      In particular, as an example, you dead pig scenario is a great one, but needs to have a more involved ‘set up’ for the Reader to get the idea.
      I seem to be out of ‘ marks so I will come back a bit later.

      (gotta go over and see if Considerer has put my photo on the wall for knife throwing practice! lol)

      *aka editing lol

      • christine says:

        The pig one was originally sent as a joke question, but I can’t wait to see how you frame it. :)

        I imagine the “answers” are going to be the most difficult part, seeing as how even within a scott/roger/clark group, the levels of each are different.

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


          the pig scenario is going to be a much broader ‘question’ which will allow us to demonstrate the principle that ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’… i.e. what does a clarklike farmer think about, how does a scottian farmer act (that’ll be easy!) and how does a rogerian farmer feel about the whole farm thing.
          That is both the challenging part and the fun part. We (meaning me and anyone else who would enjoy trying) need to imagine being a clark and a scott and a roger and come up with (3) answers that will make the most sense to the appropriate one. (the lead-in to the test will be something to the effect: ‘select the answer that you most agree with’). But think of the benefits of simply trying! One of the goals of the Doctrine itself is to understand the worldview of the other two types so well that you can see the world as they do!

    • Considerer says:

      It’s amazing – in the time between leaving my inbox and arriving in Clark’s, a whole lot of text has appeared which just WAS NOT THERE BEFORE!

      Methinks ‘contributed by a Downspring and heavily edited’ might be a better way of putting it…

      • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


        what? who the hell did that?? lol (oh, wait a minute!! that was me!) This is going to be totally educational, instructive, insightful and…and! interesting (from a Doctrine pov, of course!)

        Never having been in a position to edit things and such, I appreciate the insight. Will make that there change there right away.

  4. RCoyne RCoyne says:

    Well. I’m not hanging out here much lately, so feel free to ignore this, but…
    What seems apparent in the test examples is this; a scenario given, with three possible responses. Each response leads directly to a classic C,S, or R… and only provides the tester the option to say ” see, I told you so, that’s how you can tell.”
    And that’s the trouble. It’s like a prosecutor in a trial that only asks leading questions. Instead of ” What happened in the park on the night of Aug. 29th?, it’s ” Isn’t it true that you beat my client half to death in the park on the night of Aug. 29th just for bus fare”?
    They’re not objective choices.
    Much better to pose the scenarios, and then let responders fill in their own unsolicited responses. It would be more difficult to discern who’s who, but your results would be much more reflective of the truth.
    So, how about-
    You’re driving on a busy highway when a speeding, texting teen cuts you off and forces you into the breakdown lane. What happens next?
    My response; I would want the license plate of the vehicle to call into 911, and would pursue said vehicle if I hadn’t already gotten it. (That’s pretty frightening right there. That’s my honest first response, and I’m not real comfortable with it, so what does that mean?)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


      That would be a valid approach (and, given the conditions and premise of that test) we could, in fact, figure out the predominant worldview of the test takerer… however ( you saw that coming, no? lol)

      I should apologize to the Readers out there who have not been keeping up, as I have not provided sufficient background on our little test project.

      The current project is to create a test that can be used online by visitors to the Wakefield Doctrine. This test will be available to help them determine their predominant worldview. The assumption is that they have found themselves here, are intrigued by the notion (that) personality types are simply the result of the personal reality that one has grown up in and they are in a damn hurry to understand whether they are one of those weird clarks or crazy and sexy scotts or those fastidious and precise rogerian people.
      So they will want a test that, when they are done answering the questions, hit the ‘Finish’ ( or ‘Hurry up!!’ or ‘Well, I’ve answered your little questions, please inform me of the results’) Button there will be an Answer!

      Your approach would, in fact, work provided there was the time and the manpower. There is not.

      I would say, as I did in my last Reply to Christine, that the challenge of crafting ‘Answers’ that are irresistible to clarks and scotts and rogers will be fun and educational, for those of us who have this Doctrine perspective in our head from morning til night.