from each according to (their) ability | the Wakefield Doctrine from each according to (their) ability | the Wakefield Doctrine

from each according to (their) ability

 

Our topic today is work and the Wakefield Doctrine.

“…purpose of the Wakefield Doctrine is…to understand those around us…at work…”

We must say at this point that the (principles) of the Wakefield Doctrine tend to be three (slightly) different things to three (significantly) different people. Like it or not, we have the topic for today’s Post: applying the Doctrine in the workplace, so let us do this thing. I maintain that you are all intelligent enough, more importantly (you all) have the flexibility in thinking that not very many people have; this capacity to work ‘beyond the limits’ of common sense, to deal with the improbable is what makes any and all of this blog possible. (cough!!  err! ahem!!!). Following is a definition from: otec.uoregon.edu/intelligence, in their little article about intelligence.

 Intelligence is a combination of the ability to:
1. Learn. This includes all kinds of informal and formal learning via any combination of experience, education, and training.
2. Pose problems. This includes recognizing problem situations and transforming them into more clearly defined problems.

3.
Solve problems. This includes solving problems, accomplishing tasks, fashioning products, and doing complex projects

To the point at hand: the workplace. If you are still in school then you can substitute a particular class for the ‘workplace’, the dynamics will remain the same.

So, what about the workplace (hey! did I see a new font?…) that is amenable from the perspective of the Doctrine? Very simply, it is that once you understand the world that the other person is experiencing, you are then in a position to communicate effectively. Put another way, imagine that you were fluent in all languages; you then try to communicate with someone over a closed circuit TV, with the sound off. (You also have the ability to read lips). Until you know the language the other person is using to communicate, you will not be able to understand them or be understood….no matter what, no matter how hard you try or how smart you may be…

(…omg…is there a librarian in the house?!…someone stop him…getting sleepy…sleepier…sleepiest…)

Alright…I get it, it, it… boring…bad writing…un-inspired topic….I can accept that…and I am determined ( oh…oh..) to present this topic today, so you might as well resign yourself to a serious Post. As a matter of fact, not just resign yourself but give your own damn selfs up to the process:

 now just focus on the center ‘x’ and (yeah you got to click on the diagram to get it into motion) when you see the color of the moving dot change, raise your hand…we will continue then

What? Still in possession of critical thought processes? Damn this is a tough crowd…

Look, I’m a reasonable person…(I’m a frickin clark, for christ’s sake…how much more reasonable do you want?), but I have a topic that will present the value of the Wakefield Doctrine for people experiencing difficulty in the workplace…not Noble Prize level ambition but surely a step above “Learn the Secrets to Dating Hot Girls!!! Free Information!!!” or “how to get rich in real estate courstey of some person of indeterminate gender sitting in some faux library, during whose infomercial I guarantee you will spend most of you time trying to see if the speaker has an Adams’s apple“! This is a modest ambition, simply to say to those people for whom a major part of the workday is spent wishing they could be anyplace other than where they are, “Hey! You are not alone, we know how you feel (in one of three ways, that is lol), and we can help you feel differently”. The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) does offer this to people, I totally know to be true. But…if you are not going to listen…if you need an imaginary High School student (…hey thats  ‘an imaginary High School student with a 3.8 GPA to you’ !!…) to sit long enough through a  poorly written exegesis, then maybe this is not for you…or maybe we throw subtlety to the wind and bring out the big guns…I really did not want to resort to this so soon….I only just got access…(hey, they have already seen it!!!) nah, you underestimate how stupid these Readers can be, all in a hurry to find the punchline so they can click onto the next blog on their list of “15 Ways to Spend the Day Vicariously and Still appear to be Working”…screw it…you want simple? you want the value of the Doctrine…the result of a lifetime of effort in a 3 minute read…fine… I got ya font…right here…

Awright, people, listen up. You know that you want to read this ’cause its in comic sans and nobody dont like the comic sans. So here’s the deal: at work if you are a clark you will be bothered pretty much only by the rogers there…stay out of their way and don’t talk more than you have to, you cannot out-think them. Rogers, you having trouble at work? real simple…it is another more aggressive roger, just stay in your herd, do not engage a single roger in conflict; only the scotts will benefit from that little interaction. Scotts? (scotts, my poor scotts…) hey, try not to eat everything that moves on the first day and those rogers? they are the reason you have your high paying/high profile sales/management jobs…hey your appetite is gonna be the end of ya….

 

 

 

Share

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

Comments

  1. AKH says:

    Whoa…. Hold on there. Sympathizer. Trying to make the clan of rogers feel better about themselves? Heaven forbid they should come into conflict with anybody. That’s right. Just keep moving and keep to yourselves. I mean really. Rogers are the grunt workers. The cogs of the machine. They don’t have the balls to take on the responsibility. Where would they be without direction? Scotts are the brilliant ones. They are the movers and the shakers who make things happen. They are the ones who conduct the orchestra of subordinates. Don’t get me wrong. Rogers are necessary. But left to fend for themselves they would surely starve. Poor things (not).

  2. clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

    …okay but what about the clarks? they actually are the ones who do the work…rogers are usually the managers (bad ones, but still managers)…scotts for the most part are the salesmen…
    scotts are territorial, they cannot keep to a small area cause (you people) will eat the entire herd…it is a balance thing…
    the key idea of this Post is that while everyone knows that the workplace can be an unpleasant place, how to deal with the people (who appear to be the source) of the unpleasantness, is where the Doctrine is uniquely able to help with…it is never the job, it is always the people and…
    it is never just the other person, it is you and them…

  3. Downspring#1 says:

    I agree with (the) clark and his comments.
    What is needed is a little patience – to see the dynamics at work(in my example) in the workplace, to recognize the 3 forms and then behave accordingly . I offer my own experience at Groceryland. I am surrounded by rogers with a smattering of scotts and just a dollop of clarks. I have refrained from being overly “clarklike” as I am “out of my element” but more importantly because I wish to put the Doctrine “to work” (for me). And that is how I got a little scott to tell me the other day that “she had my back”. (good little scott).
    To clarify I am not dismissing, judging or belittling anyone, be they clark, scott or roger but rather engaging in my own little personality/behavioral experiment.
    The Wakefield Doctrine aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers can be tested in any situation and I extend a challenge for others to test the “theory” and let us all know the results. Rogers out there – tell us of your dealings with clarks; scotts – what of your dealings with rogers. Clarks – you need to tell us of your dealings with everyone:)

  4. clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

    I totally agree, but I share less of the (apparent) optimism of DownSpring#1 about the willingness of anyone (including Reader clarks) to actually do anything with this thing…rogers? unless they have a scott standing in the middle of their fuckin herd, wearing a bib that says “got rogers?” are not going to bother remembering this because they live in a self-contained, perfect world (except for the constant disappearance of herd members, like in that fuckin claymation movie staring Mel Gibson)…scotts? don’t make me laugh…they have the attention span that is measured in terms of the rate a body cools after death…and clarks? you mean “don’t bother me I already know everything and the more you show me a better way the more I will resist learning because I am so into learning everything? those clarks?…yeah right…..(hey is this thing on?)

  5. AKH says:

    Ever hear of the Glenn Miller Orchestra?

  6. AKH says:

    Not a trick question. You wanna “chime” in Glenn?