relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 16 relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 16

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…once more, from the top.’

November 6, 2023 By

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

This RePrint post is fun and on the money in a (slightly) intense, ‘are-there-total-strangers-reading-this?’ sorta way.

Two notes before we flip the switch on the WABAC machine*: 1) this is from the earlier days, before we discovered the more economical, if not surely more elegant, concept connecting the three personal realities: clarks (Outsider), scotts (Predator) and rogers (Herd Members); the concept is relationship. (More informatively: ‘How we relate ourselves to the world around us and the people who make it up.’). And b) the key is still the same: the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world and, as such, is a tool for understanding (and, on occasion, having fun),

ed. Damn! Just noticed the date on this post. Way early in the checkered past of this here blog here.

*

“…and thats why he’s so mean!*” Hey! wait just a minute!

November 13, 2010

Welcome  …etc

I want to apologise to any Readers who have found themselves saying, “hey I’m not looking for a comedy blog or a music appreciation site, I don’t really need the wryly witty musings of a frustrated writer!”  This morning I find myself sitting at this computer saying to myself,  “where did I get off track“?  Vanity apparently is so more insidious than I would have thought. Staring at the monitor, drinking coffee and while waiting inspiration a Post to show up (…a lot like taking a copy of the New York Times into the bathroom, you really hope that it will not be necessary, but are resigned to the fact that it will), I caught myself critiquing ideas in such terms as, “nah, that’s not funny“, ” yeah but, they’ll never get that TV show reference“, and “I think I might get away with that“.
The question rose in my mind, quite without welcome, “just when did I stop trying to present the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) as a new and exciting way of thinking and instead decide that every Post that showed up on the site had to be amusing“? Now don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with being amusing.  If we were to meet in person and hang out, you would find yourself laughing at least once;  but the question I cannot avoid asking myself  is, “What is that I think people are coming to this blog for?  Funny/wacky/weird Posts or are they here to learn about the Wakefield Doctrine?   Well, the ‘sign on the door’ says that this is the Wakefield Doctrine,  it does not say ‘the Entertaining and Random Musing and Literary Stylings of…”
I realized this morning that the Readers who have come to this blog over the last 12 months did so because they were interested/curious/intrigued by (this) idea  of ours. The idea, quite unique and definitely worth investigating,  that there really were three personality types and that the description of the three types was kinda fun and funny, but mostly, this Wakefield Doctrine actually worked, it delivered the goods.

The problem may not been all strictly the price of vanity, ( “hey! great Post!” “where do you come up with those videos“, “that picture on the front? funny!”), in my own defense I will say that a part of my motivation for trying to be amusing and funny  is simply that I am  a clark. And we (clarks) like nothing more than to know things, lots or things, different things and most of the time useless things!  It did not take long to see how well received some of the funnier Posts were and it only made sense to try to write more of those and to try and not be so…dry…pedantic…clarklike! But in all fairness, a huge  part of my drive to write whatever I thought would get read came from the fact that the Wakefield Doctrine  is fun.
We (Progenitors and DownSprings) do laugh when we get together! People who learn about the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers do get excited about seeing it work in real life.
In a way, glenn was half right (as usual) when he complained recently that these Posts have lost the spirit of the early days of the Doctrine blog, that in losing this supposed spirit of subversiveness the whole thing was in danger of losing relevancy. To a small degree I agree, the early days of the Doctrine did have a sense of stick to basics, i.e. clarks create, scotts sell and rogers gather the masses. That, by the simple fact that none of us had ever tried to create something like this blog,  everything was new and exciting and risky. (Of course, life is like that its ownself! And while one might argue that uncomplicated, unencumbered and un-restrained child is the epitome of spontaneity, I would just as soon trade in some free spiritness in exchange for not thinking that reaching into my diapers and throwing feces at asserbys is the height of humor. But that’s just old clarklike me).
In any event, it is time to get back to the basics. This is not to say that  we  be returning to the writing style of the first Post(s). There have been changes in how these Posts are presented, changes that not only make  reading them more enjoyable, (the the photos and the videos), but also make the writing of these things less than a total chore.
Sorry for getting dazzled by the bright lights, the fame, ‘you like me, you really, really like me’… I believe I understand now where I have gone off track.

My job is to tell you about the Wakefield Doctrine (theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).  The goal of this blog is to show (a) way to view the behavior of those people (in our lives) that will help you to make sense of their behavior. I will present the theory and the Doctrine and you will find it helpful and usable and fun (or not).  We will leave the charm and  psychotic-affability to the rogers and the scotts can take care of the leadership and seduction-as-an-end-in-itself. Both are blessed with talents that only they enjoy.

But it is Friday Saturday. Enough with the lessons ‘n learning. Well, maybe a little learning.

Here is a quick ‘elevator-ride’ description of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers):
…picture a large parking lot, maybe one quarter of the spaces are taken, mostly towards the stores…there is a red ball in the middle of the open space the ball is rolling with the wind, stopping, rolling again with each vagrant breeze…
a scott will notice it first and be immediately on the alert, he/she will simply stop in their tracks and look around, trying to see the cause of the ball’s motion; they need to know  is it a threat or not? that is their priority. (If it proves to be harmless and they have the time and/or an audience,  the scott will pick up the ball and throw it)…(thereby establishing their dominance, lol)
a roger will eventually notice the ball, if there is a pause in their conversation with whomever they are talking to, they too will look around the parking lot, but unlike the scott they will look only at the other people, does the ball belong to them? do the other people fear the ball?, who seems to be in charge of determining the ‘threat-level’ of the red ball? If no one emerges as being in charge (a scott) or the other people are not showing any interest, the roger will put it all out of their mind and get back to their busy lives, (if asked they will blame the ball for making them late)..
a clark will notice the ball………. eventually, (once they notice it) they will immediately try to determine how the other people in the parking lot are regarding the ball, the main concern for the clark is determining if the ball belongs to anyone in the parking lot or if there is a danger that someone will blame (the clark) for taking/stealing the ball, if a crowd has gathered (rogers) and if there is no one in charge (scotts) the clark will speculate aloud about the possible origin of the ball,  if however,  the clark comes upon the ball and the parking lot is totally empty, the clark will still speculate about it’s origins (aloud or silently, depending on mood) will look around to see who is secretly watching, consider taking the ball home but will leave without it.

The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) can tell you about people in everyday situations. You will be better able to predict the behavior of others using the precepts of the Doctrine. There is a bunch of information relating to a description of the three types that you need to know, but for today this little example will serve to answer the question: ‘what good is this thing, this Wakefield Doctrine’? In the coming days we will try to present descriptions of what makes the clarklike person a clark, a scottian man or woman a scott and how to identify the rogerian personality.

*

 

*them geniuseseses Jay Ward and Company back in the Before Time

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 23, 2023 By

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

Lemme paste a short, little RePrint post here. Kinda serves the function of stretching before exercise or having one of those dreams that are singularly repetitive and, should be boring enough to put the ‘dream you’ even further unconscious, were it not for the concept that ties it all together. Something so simple and fundamental that it should be obvious, but always one thought away from being expressed.

Remind us to talk tomorrow about the tri-interdependency of the three predominant worldviews.

(Pre-Notes: ‘Mu’ (in the title of the RePrint) is an allusion to the word in some zen koans. At least to the extent evident in the following postless post*)

Mu -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘the Weekend in (re)-View: there were encouraged smiles in Outerville’

February 9, 2015
Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

BeFunky_photo-3.jpg

…I thought I had the ‘hook’ for today’s Post earlier this morning, around 6:10am. My computer froze up and the Error Message appeared:

Hit continue to ‘Force Quit’ the Application

damn!  doesn’t that describe what happens to clarks so often? (Especially on Mondays because we’ve just had two days during which time we could pick the people we were with), we learn and remember that part of what the Wakefield Doctrine offers is, as they so cleverly put it, ‘to self-improve oneself’. But this weekend was encouraging. A good TToT and a good Call-in discussion. So today, I will go out into the world (see, I told you I was a clark!) and know that there are other clarks struggling with the semi-self-imposed status of Outsider and, simply by virtue of this (identification with other clarks), I will more frequently remember to not forget that I have a choice in how I think and act and feel.

Had a great Saturday Night Call-in this weekend. Cynthia, Denise and the Progenitor roger! Topic: how do clarks best deal with the roger in the workplace (or to be a bit more accurate: how to manage a rogerian-dominated workplace). Very fun and informative and entertaining and everything you could want from a phone conversation.

So what do we clarks know now that we did not know, say, 3 or 4 years ago? For starters, that there is a direct (but not directly appreciable) benefit from associating with clarks in a context that encourages identification (with/for the other clarks). We also better understand our selfs and while this is not, in and of itself, a benefit, it is the sharing of this (increased) self-understanding that makes the identificationing with other clarks so effective.

But enough about clarks. how about scotts and rogers? What are they getting out of this thing that they could not get elsewhere? Again, for starters:

  • an increased sense of awareness of that which bothers scotts (on a pre-conscious level), with a better acceptance that it is not a flaw (this, by virtue of the scott’s heightened clarklike aspect)
  • (for the rogers) a sense of an increased-enthusiasm-for-nothing-that-is-identifiable, yet not perceived as threatening

 

 

 

Feet notes:

so: Denise and Cyn-thee-uh  and the Progenitor roger were all on the Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Call-in this Saturday past. It was a splendid time, the high points, syllabus-istically speaking the insight nodes were as follows:

topic: how do clarks manage (themselves or others) in the workplace  with an emphasis on the difficulties of dealing with rogerian co-workers

agreed: the negative, ‘lashing out’ of a roger is worse than being nipped by a scott or ignored by a clark

agreed: that the reason for this ‘over-reaction’ by the clark is their emotional investment (conscious or otherwise)

agree: the tendency is for clarks to take (false) responsibility for the actions, reactions and consequences involving others

agree: rogers (and scotts) think they know what it is it fear (the negative) reactions of others, but they are wrong

agree: rogers do not accept admission of ineptitude, no member of the Herd would ever consider this

 

*

* ha ha

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 17, 2023 By

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

Easy post today*.

The thing about these RePrint posts is that they (should) encourage us to dig deeper into the Doctrine. The principles remain the same. It’s our ability to express and/or explain the Wakefield Doctrine in terms that a first-time Reader might read, enjoy and apply (in their lifes) today, that hopefully has improved.

Of the changes that have occurred, the most constructive (in terms of making this thing understandable and, therefore, useable) is the emphasis on viewing the three predominant worldviews as characteristic ways that we relate ourselves to the world around us. These being:

  1. as an Outsider (clarks) who know there is something to learn, but fear being discovered as lacking in fundamental knowledge, i.e. how it is to feel ‘a part of’. The result is a person who is never far away but rarely directly involved
  2. as might the Predator (scotts) damn! these guys** are never boring, sometimes interesting, and always on the move (literally almost as much as figuratively). They are, as well, the easiest of the three to spot
  3. Herd Member (rogers) the majority of the population at large, (common estimates put them at 63 to 68 percent of the population)… this makes them both the most available (of the three personality types) to study and the most problematic for one of ‘the other two’ to contend with in one’s daily life in the ‘real’ world.

If a mirror is not handy, then find yourself among the people you meet today’, the Wakefield Doctrine: once you start seeing clarks, scotts and rogers…they won’t go away

October 16, 2012

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

The Wakefield Doctrine is a unique insight into the behavior of the people in our lives (and outside of our lives). The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the fact that everyone lives  in what amounts to a ‘personal reality’ (aka a worldview).1 For the Reader willing to accept this premise, we offer three characteristic worldviews that account for:  you, me, the person who woke you up this morning, the Physician who will change your life in a single statement, the child you remember being on the perfect Halloween Evening, the woman who said she would love no other, the Teacher who you hated, the man who promised to return, the dreams of the future, the regrets of the past and your smile (to yourself) that you are still reading this thing.

The characteristic worldviews are (that of):

  1. the Outsider, you wake up each day knowing that the world is ‘out there’ and you are ‘here’, you are creative and funny and have an insatiable appetite to learn things, anything, for the joy of discovery and in the (secret) hope of learning the secret of how to be ‘a part of’ to not be the Outsider. This is the clark personality
  2. the Predator, you wake up each morning hungry…physically, spiritually, socially, sexually. A scott, (this is the personality type that naturally results from living in the worldview of the Predator), is always on the move, always alert, aggressive, fun to be with, mercurial, loud, un-shy and outlandish. It is said of the scottian individual, “I scream, therefore I am”
  3. the Member of the Herd, as a roger you are confident in the rightness of the world and constantly worried about sufficiently understanding the proper way to live, you are a social genius, you are a very encouraging listener and an inveterate gossip. You believe that Reality and the Universe is quantifiable and governed by Rules, your understanding of these Rules invests you with Power and Responsibility to everyone you encounter, rogers are responsible for Civilization and the Spanish Inquisition, the stability of  governance and the Salem Witch Trials

The theory (of the Wakefield Doctrine)  is that we are all born with the capability to live in one of these three worldviews and that at an early age (3-5), we all settle into what becomes our predominant worldview. Although this predominant worldview becomes our defining reality, we never lose the capacity to act as we would if we were in the ‘other two worldviews’. This is why many people, upon first trying out the Doctrine, write in and say, “Hey, I know my type, but there are times when I act like one of the other two! What the hell?” This is the example of what we call a secondary aspect, where a person ’employs’ a characteristic of the non-dominant worldviews to deal with a situation. It is usually a passing thing, nothing to be alarmed about.2

The Wakefield Doctrine is not only unique, it is easy to use! It does not ask questions, does not require the individual (you, the Reader, who else would we mean??!)  t0 complete a survey or describe their likes, dislikes and favorite colors.  There is no math to be performed, no charts or graphs (“…your personality type is somewhere on this scale that runs from 0 = Savior of Mankind to 10 = Geez, what a jerk!”)

The Wakefield Doctrine simply maintains that your personality is the natural result of your growing up, developing and living in one of the three worldviews.

The Wakefield Doctrine is not only unique and easy, it is fun! If you learn the characteristics of the three personality types, go out into your day today, you will see at least one clark and one scott (and by inference a bunch of rogers), and they will act just like we describe in these Pages. So go out, try it and come back and say “Hey Make it stop now!! Sure this is a valid insight, but my husband!!  he is such a roger! I can’t stop giggling when he tries to tell me how great a hobby that (genealogy, re-enacting, bicycling is). Make it stop!”

Thats it for today.

Thanks for behaving! We have a group of new people here today (yes, those odd locations in the feedjit, the whispering in the back of the classroom) not to worry! Most will leave as soon as the Tour bus gets here. Sure, why not? “Now,everone say hello to all them folks what came by from Bloppy Bloggers!

 

1)  nothing weird, really! We are not saying that reality is what you want it to be ( well, we actually do say that) and we are not proposing that the world at large is less real and concrete than your personal world,  (err..better hold that thought too) and we are so not saying that this is a personality theory that requires the user to have  a certain, special quality that combines intellectual confidence and a desire to imagine what if? (damn! 3 for 3…back up to the Post now, enough about you, this is about how the Wakefield Doctrine will make your today much more interesting).

2)  actually this business of secondary aspects holds the key to the Wakefield Doctrine being used as the best of self-improvement, self-development tools! But that’s for later, this is an introduction to the Doctrine, yo.

 

* for us, not (necessarily) for you. lol

** in the currently used non-denominational application… Reminder: The Wakefield Doctrine is gender (and culture and age) neutral. We’re talking lifeforms here, people. Its all about how we relate ourselfs to the world around us and the people who make it up***

*** as traditional, this note: That last? About relating ourselfs to the world…? We did not say, ‘how we relate to…’! We totally said, ‘How we relate ourselfs to…’  Huge-ass difference, yo. New Readers? Key Concept here. Most assuredly will be on the Quiz (and the Final and a part of conversation, which, if’n you have dreams of being one of the cool kids). It way behooves you to ask us the question if you’re having any difficulty with the concept.

Remember the old saying****: “There are no stupid questions, only your questions.”

**** Full Disclosure: stole (or paraphrased) this from the legendary ad guy from the 1950s, David Ogilvy, who said, ‘The customer is not a moron. She’s your wife.’  We do not expect anyone to take offense at this expression. Gender neutral, remember?

We all know the question that should be running through the Reader’s mind, at this point, don’t we?

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Monday Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

September 11, 2023 By

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

(Will try our best to produce a little original content at the bottom of the following RePrint post.)

-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of clarks and pre-emptive denigration’

May 4, 2015

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)John-Grimek-le-premier-Mister-Univers-1948-dans-un-mouvement-special

(Note for New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine is about nothing, if it’s not about understanding ‘the way that we relate ourselves to the world around us’.*)

This concept of pre-emptive denigration initially emerged from a conversation about how clarks tend to laugh too often. No! yeah, I did so say that! And I mean it, even though I suspect that making this statement will generate multiple  parentheseses and feet notes…*

clarks laugh too often and, these events of laughter, are (often) the manifestation of preemptory denigration. We (clarks) laugh, (and self-denigrate), to take the pressure off  ourselves. A clark will, at times, take on a responsibility that becomes the focus of attention of the people around them. It may be at the job or in class or perhaps even calling out a teacher who appears to be singling out our child in a negative fashion. No matter what the individual circumstance, there are times that clarks find themselves the center of attention. Somebody out there want to tell the Readers what the biggest fear of a clark is?  Anyone?  lol…. no, don’t worry! I won’t insist on a Comment. lol.  Z?  no, I know you know! lets give the others a chance.  Christine?  (well, yes… fear of failure is close, but we’re going for something a little more personal.)  Kristi? (  being wrong?  very good and quite close! but still something more… or less specific).

New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we live in one of three worldviews (personal realities). The personal reality that we grew up in is referred to as our predominant worldview and is sorta what others call personalty type. We have clarks (the Outsider), scotts (Predators!!!) and rogers (people who live in the world as a Member of the Herd). The really tricky part of this Doctrine is that these personal realities are real. They are not: interests or inclinations, (they aren’t) tropisms or sub-conscious drives, nor phobias or likes and dislikes. The world I woke up to this morning is the reality of the Outsider. And my way of relating myself to the world today is the most efficient and effective in terms of successfully navigating the course of my Monday, May 4th. Oh, yeah!!  one other thing. You’re born with the potential of all three. You live in only one, but have the potential to have the behaviors and strategies of ‘the other two’ at times and to certain degrees (most often at times of duress).

ok! times up! the answer? ‘scrutiny’.  What clarks fear the most (well, not quite, what they fear the most, but the way that clarks express to themselves, what they believe they fear the most), is commonly called scrutiny.

….where does the time go?!  Quick wrap up:

  • clarks laugh too often in order to ‘hedge their own bet’…. (ex: I will write a book about the Wakefield Doctrine. No, don’t worry I won’t mention names or addresses… ha ha)
  • clarks do not do this hedging because they don’t take themselves seriously enough, but because they take themselves too seriously
  • clarks, being Outsiders, have way too little sense of acceptable risk of failure (as defined by themselves, but ascribed to everyone around them)
  • the pre-emptive denigration?  ‘I’ll give my best shot, hope you’re not disappointed’  ‘I don’t know, yeah I can try’  ‘Look, if this doesn’t work out…’  ‘Before I start, maybe I could ask a few more questions, you know?’

You know, this book writing isn’t as easy as it seems. (ha ha)

 

 

* and this concept is so key and so easily misunderstood, that I’ll point out that what was just said was ‘the way that we relate ourselves to the world around us’ not ‘how we relate to the world’. This is a very common mis-something…but that one little word, ‘ourselves‘ totally makes all the difference in the world.

** I will make this my last footnote, someone out there is absolutely correct. I do sometimes underestimate my Readers and do not have to explain everything. Although, in  my own defense I’ll say, “I’m still striving for the Perfect Post, which, by definition, will be directed at the New Reader. But you’re right, I need to stop with the extra explanations

*

Thanks and a shout-out to Friend of the Doctrine Cynthia for modeling a Doc-tee in the photo at the top of the post. A true multi-capable person, while it may still be in a remodel phase, totally worth your while to stop by at Art Funky Media.

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

et tu Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

September 5, 2023 By

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

Hey, sent this (post below) to myself the other day! Let’s see what it is we thought we needed to recall/re-read!

‘and a thousand telephones, that will not ring’ the Wakefield Doctrine: the theory of personality predicated on three characteristic worldviews

November 13, 2012

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of personality that you get to enjoy with your friends and them, before it gets all famous and mainstreamy and everyone will know about it)

Question: If your husband is a roger and you are a clark, is it true that they never accept how much you have changed over the years, since you first met?
Answer: Too true1

(Welcome to ‘ya shoulda just asked Tuesday’! We will be presenting some common questions and the semi-comprehensive answers…along with a little commentary, mostly to let us get away with dividing the page into block quotes.’)

Question: My best friend is funny and fun to be with, but sometimes when we are around other people he gets like, mean even goes and picks on me. But this happens only with certain people, this big kid that (my friend) knows. What gives?

Answer: Chances are your friend is a scott and the person that, when they’re around, your friend starts acting mean?…well, that other person is a scott too, but they are what we call dominant (to your friend). So your friend, even though he is picking on you, doesn’t mean to hurt your friendship… it’s a pack2 thing, you know?
Answer: jeez, if you say so

(This question deals with the changing pack order (from the scottian perspective) and it’s effects on the behavior of a scott. Note: this question (and by implication, the experience cited), will most likely be posed by a clark. Do you know why that should be?)

Question: My fiancée and I are getting close to the Big Day. When we first got engaged, we both agreed to keep the ceremony and everything on the quiet, low-key side, but lately, ( the wedding is in 3 months), she has been talking more to her sisters and some of her old friends and it seems like the guest list is getting bigger and bigger. What gives?

Answer: She is probably a roger. Forget about changing her mind. It means a lot to her, in a way that you will never understand.  So relax! Sneak a couple of your friends that she might not have approved when the guest list was small, she probably won’t even notice now, and if she does make an issue of it, say the following to her (word for word): “I understand how important family is to you now. And even though I am not close to my family, you have shown me that my feelings3 of friendship with (fill in the names of you friends) make them like family. Won’t you let my family join your family …darling?“

(And there are those who would say, ‘Hey Wakefield Doctrinaires! Sure you have a uniquely clever take on personality types, but what about practical applications? Huh, what about those?‘ Well, here ya go! Who cannot not identify with this situation? …not counting the rogers, of course!)

Question: My boss is nice enough, but it seems like he tries too hard to be, like my friend or something! Every day it is ‘how are you doing?’, “is there anything I can do to make your job easier?” I mean, all the time! I can’t get any work done when he is in the office, he is always offering to ‘help’! I might be able to deal with this, except that every time I do get some work done that he needs to sign off on, he always finds  fault! And if I come up with something on my own initiative (he likes to say that he wants me to try to ‘think outside the box’) he is either totally negative or acts like he is amazed that I actually did it myself!  Should I quite my job?
Answer: Probably.4

(This Question deals with a scenario that is all too common. And, although we do not propose that all bosses are rogers, we will say this, ‘If your boss is a scott you have: a) a good time everyday up until the day he decides that it is time to change careers or b) a lead pipe cinch of a sexual harassment lawsuit, so the day you get tired of her shenanigans, ‘it’s sayonara see ya in court’
If your boss is a clark, then we know the following: a) if your clarklike boss is female then her boss is a roger, if your clarklike boss is male then his boss is a scott!  and b) they (clarks) make great bosses, will stick up for you totally against all opponents, but jeez! enough with the leadership by consensus! Get a set, yo.

That music referenced in the Title of today’s Post? Totally weird. I’m sitting and watching TV and a commercial comes on and before I can hit ‘MUTE’ I hear the music in the background (of the commercial) and I’m off to the great and omnicient google… and here we are

 

1) rogers are about consistency, if they are about anything at all! The worldview of the herd (rogers) maintains that history, tradition, continuity…consistency is of the greatest good! The worldview is also one in which the individual’s relationship with the world-at-large manifests primarily in emotional terms. So when a (lasting) relationship forms, the details of ‘the other’ person are important, in a sense, manifesting the emotional investment. So, as time goes by, even though people change and grow and develop, the roger will still insist on seeing the ‘original person’

2) scotts, in the initial behavioral metaphor: like pack animals, i.e. wolves, dogs, lions and such. The social ranking in the pack is one of simple dominance, an alpha at ‘the top’ and everyone else in order of strength/prowess/capability downward from there. It is a primary characteristic of the scottian personality type to establish ranking when entering a new (social ) environment. Literally going from person to  person, figuratively pushing them on the shoulder in order to establish ranking

3) emotions! always play the emotion-card when dealing with rogers!

4) you could try to…nah, don’t even bother.  Maybe if you got to the Doctrine sooner, you might have learned enough to invoke your own rogerian aspect to re-configure your work relationship… but too hard, too frustrating, easier to get another job. But then again, most bosses/middle managers/supervisors/Principals are rogers!  so maybe you should be asking about the Wakefield Doctrine School of Self-Improving Oneself…school

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »