Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
So I was on the Brunch* with Michelle this Sunday. We were talking about ways to practice the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine.** This practice mostly involves observing the people around us and holding up ‘the lens’ of the three worldviews. As a result, (of this practice) we are in a position to learn the characteristics of (each worldview) better and are able to determine a person’s predominant worldview more quickly and without having to stop and consult our charts and graphs and such.
In any event, we were talking about how the Doctrine is about ‘us and not them‘ and Michelle said something to the effect of, ‘yes, I realize I have to see the world as the other person sees it’ and I was all, ‘yes! no! sort of like that but different!’
(What I went on to say, this fine September Sunday Morning) was that it is not so much ‘seeing the world as the other person sees it’ (an admirable goal in the hopes of understanding the people in our lives), rather it was, ‘seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it’. A critical difference! An example of the difference between the words ‘sees it’ and ‘experiences it’: If Michelle and I were standing on the sidewalk (say, someday when I embark on the Great Wakefield Doctrine World Tour), and we both look across the street at the restaurant she is suggesting we stop at for lunch, we both will see the world the same, i.e. a street in Singapore and a building with a sign that says, 真正的藍菜 thats our common reality. But the Wakefield Doctrine charges us to ‘see the world as the other person experiences it’.
So my host will be looking (experiencing) at the sign and remembering the enjoyable meals she has had with friends and family and the sign will say, ‘Good Eats!’*** At that very same moment, I will look (experiencing) at the sign and think, “nice building, damn! eating in a restaurant…will I know what to do? will there be a crowd? will I look like an idiot?’
While this simple difference, to discover what the other person is experiencing, rather than just seeing, may seem a bit daunting, the result, when successful is totally worthwhile. With the perspective of the Wakefield Doctrine you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves.
Before our conversation ended, I suggested to Michelle that, as a roger, she might find the following an interesting task for week ahead: when at work (I suggested), she should engage in conversation with other rogers while in a setting in which there are other people, within earshot but at work, that is not a part of her conversation. At some point she should say something funny or slightly outrageous, while watching (from the corner of her eye) the people who were seemingly hard at work. The person who stopped what they were doing (typing or writing or whatever) when she made her statement…they would be the clark in the room.
(As a ‘follow-up’ task, I suggested that she (Michelle) find a way to let this clark know that she knew that they were an Outsider.)
Now, isn’t the Wakefield Doctrine a fun personality theory?
* the Wakefield Doctrine Sunday Morning Video Brunch, of course!
** the Wakefield Doctrine is, among other things, a perspective on the behavior of the people in our lives. Taking advantage of the unique perspective that the Doctrine provides will allow you to know things about the other person that you really should have no way of knowing! The value of this (insight) is twofold: a) you will understand better why a person acts as they do and 2) you can totally amaze them with your insight!
*** loosely translated.
About clarkscottroger
That is a great point to put in bold letters, not the fine print. There is a big difference between seeing and experiencing, and it helps explain this doctrine much better.
Christine
good call (I expect no less from the scotts who get this Doctrine thing)… I hope my ‘example’ i.e. Michelle and I standing and looking across the street in Singapore conveys that distinction.
… so, just bold print or bold and italics? let me know your thoughts… I will add underlines in the meantime. lol
Fun, and one tough challenge too!
Michelle
I know you are up to the task and we all wait for (your) report on the effort!
How should the clark play with the roger or the scott in an office setting? (I’m asking for a friend.)
Tracy
well, lets start with the ‘How should the clark play with…’ what I this ‘play’ that speak of?? lol (just kidding*)
If the question is, how should a clark approach a scott or a roger… a lot depends on the intent (of the clark). For fun, you will find the clark standing around on the outer edges of the crowd that surrounds the scott… and they (the clark) will make some kind of wise-assed remark that only the scotts are meant to hear.
rogers…a whole different matter… more care is called for
that help?
*sort of
I have perfected the wise-ass remark. That the scotts hear. And the rogers do too, they just don’t get it. (I totally don’t mean that in a mean way.)
:)
Very tough assignment! Good luck, Michelle!
I’m glad my task this summer was a simpler one.
Good post. The meat of the matter. How can we talk about “seeing” the world as one of the other 2 without talking about the fact the “feeling” going on is what is at the heart of it all.
What does a person “feel” when they are in a situation, place, or out and around people? This place holds the key to how we relate ourselves to our environment.
I’m a clark, therefore everything takes place on an intellectual plane first (in my damn head). I have to “think” about things. Compare that to a scott whose all about action/reaction, spontaneity, survival and sustenance.
rogers. They can be tricky but again, proof is in the pudding. It’s emotion, it’s about them, it’s about how things make them feel. It is. They define their world and their sticking to it!
“clarks think”, “scotts act”, “rogers feel”. The key is laid metaphorically at all of our feet with that little ditty. If anyone remembers anything after visiting this blog it should be that. Good base from which to build.
“clarks are of the future”, “scotts are of the here/now”, “rogers are of the past”.
Remember these things. Everything that follows will then fall into place:)
Michele! I’ll be able to make brunch this week! Hope to see you.
Christine! Brunch really can be interesting and active, even for a scott! LOL You can be in and out in a matter of minutes!!
P.S. I used process of elimination on the title – rogers have a towel thing. So true! clarks and their shoes? Duh! That leaves the scotts with the pepsi cans…but what about them?!