Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
DS#1 has posed the question:
Someone get that roger his bird water…tell him he’ll have to settle for slipper socks.
The peanut M&M’s are a go as is the Chardonnay. Cheese platter?! Fine.
Cheetos will be allowed on premises only if accompanied by an equal amount of Fritos. (regular ones, not those weird scooping ones.)
The cubanos – yes, I mean the cuban cigars. Have them personally delivered to my dressing room by Antonio Banderas. Yes, seriously.Silly, no? But what about the very real possibility. Of a radio program. Who doesn’t have a radio show these days. Seems to make sense. At some point the Doctrine will be saturating the market. Why the hell not? I, for one, have already started using terminology on a more “day to day” basis. You know, getting comfortable with it. The theory of clarks, scotts and rogers….it is what it is
Since the corollary topic appears to be centered on the ‘state of the spirit’ of the current effort to spread the Wakefield Doctrine among people inclined to ‘get it’, I will state, for the record, that I am in the midst of a project that involves my rogerian aspect.
(Compressed backstory: my rogerian aspect jumped out* recently and manifested in my workplace, effectively putting me in a position to host an after-hours social event for the other brokers in my office. Not surprisingly, the initial reaction to my emailed invitation has been mostly “WTF?” This is totally appropriate as I am a clark and have assiduously cultivated a business persona so as to include a certain non-social aspect…nothing anti-social or in any way an impediment to my work, but lets just say, I am sent invitations to the annual Christmas Party only when a new person is in charge of organizing it. So today there is a certain level of anticipation regarding tonight’s affair, if for no other reason than the contrast between my established business persona (a clark) and this episodic persona (a roger!). Oh yeah, many of the attendees are ‘aware’ of the Wakefield Doctrine and, I would like to think, they are watching to see if I can pull this off as a roger.)
So lets get all ‘water cooler’ on the Doctrine this week! No lessons (at least for now) but if you care to Comment and start another ‘conversation’ or wish to Comment on either of the two threads established in today’s Post, have at it!
About clarkscottroger
LOL So very clarklike….today’s post. If given magical powers, I would transport myself the 1200 or so miles northward to observe this social function. What a wonderful opportunity! I am already looking forward to the “after party” post! We’ll be waiting for the clark to “dish”……
Those familiar with the Doctrine will know immediately that clarks are not the “social” ones of the 3. Having said that, it is an aspect that some of us find easier to “summon” than others. I would posit that by virtue of the fact that the surprise will have worn off on those invited (a clark hosting a social funtion), this evening’s event should be fairly predictable. (by Doctrine standards) And a heck of a lot of fun!!
Pictures!! Someone must take pictures!!
it will be most enterlightenment as there is a secondary component to this particular event, i.e. a conflict with the (new) rogerian office manager, the details of this conflict is a little outside of the scope of this Post, suffice it to say that he (the manager) expressed puzzlement and pain at not being informed of this event… there is totally an aspect of a clark/roger conflict to play out…lol
Ah….I submit that at times there is a certain, how shall I say, sufferance*, on the part of clarks in their relationships with rogers. It goes to the core I suppose of their respective worldviews. clarks/outsiders v rogers/members of a “sanctioned group”, clarks/non-traditional v rogers/traditional.
The differences (at times very subtle differences) manifest in all manner of ways.
Consider:
rogers uphold history/rules and laws for everyone…
clarks on the other hand are subject to no history, law or tradition.
Surely, there is an inherent conflict, yes? lol
* this term, this identification/characterization will no doubt “upset” certain rogers. They be sensitive folk.
Ah…the unbridled joy of slipper socks. The season is almost upon us. You know me all too well.
As to the office manager thing; I have a scott/roger hybrid for a boss, and have found it best to always defer to the higher rank in all things. Office managers should be aware of what ever takes place on their watch, as a matter of simple protocol. They might possibly view anything else as an attempt to marginalize or undermine their authority.
good call… first thing this morning I received an email saying that it seems like there is a conflict involving watching the kids at 5pm… lol (quote from email):
I am sorry; I didn’t want you to think I didn’t want to support you or this
so I suspect he is in conflict, I agree he needs to be there to exert himself (slight rogerian expression) but the fact that this thing is happening without his ‘permission’ worse, despite his non-involvement offset by his wanting to ‘disenfranchise’ the event… lol
god! you people are convoluted bunch!
I’d love to be a fly on the wall for this one!
don’t think I should take a video… lol
rogers, a “convoluted bunch”? Yes, convolving all over the place. LOL Had to throw in a related adjective for our rogerian brethern.
So. The morning after? (the party) We should all be able to surmise the various comments and such around the office.(or is that “watercooler”) As to the behavior of the rogerian manager’s reaction to the host this morning? I daresay he will either “forget” there was an event or feign interest and have something rather urgent he needs to attend to.