Taking the first few micro-steps toward certification as a therapeutic riding instructor, I’ve bumped up against a hint of the same frustration I felt with corporate America (three Fortune 100s and a pair of Fortune 500s way down on the resume page). By decree of the national certifying organization (not by fiat of the particular barn where I’m in training), riding lesson plans are supposed to adhere to SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound).
Example: In the course of a one-hour lesson, the student will ride a serpentine pattern of five cones at the sitting trot twice without knocking over or missing any cones. Assuming the student can manage the sitting trot and do some steering (neither is as simple as you might think), this goal probably qualifies as specific, measurable, achievable and so forth.
Criticism of the SMART goal approach usually leans toward its tendency to reward plodding and complacency. If every goal is achievable and relevant–no moonshots, no frolics, no experimental products–many opportunities for growth and positive momentum will be lost. We will tend to set goals that are “in the bag,” or nearly so, lest we risk failure (cue scary music). In reality, this spiffy management heuristic often actually undermines good performance rather than enhances its likelihood. We “successfully” aim low over and over again when asked to set SMART goals.
But Grace, you say, pie in the sky, “I had a good time with my pony,” isn’t going to result in a lot of progress either. These are riding lessons, not riding frolics. Oh, fair enough, but SMART goals have no basis in science when applied to physical activity. They were the brain child of a management consultant who saw that vague goals in a business context could result in wheel-spinning and lack of accountability. He meant well, he had a good point.
And now we have hundreds of peer reviewed studies proving that if the aim of his methodology was to inspire improved performance, his methodology seldom works as intended, and often has the opposite result.
We’re still using his methodology. We are still using, even insisting on, a lot of bogus methodologies.
Public school teachers are supposed to develop lesson plans that incorporate different learning styles, when in fact, the myth of learning styles (myth is the American Psychological Association’s term) can be detrimental to effective teaching. Not-for-profits are still politely handing out the Myers-Briggs personality “test” at the annual off-site when that too has no basis in science whatsoever.
I am very lucky, because the instructors and mentors at my barn clearly grasp that there are prescribed rubrics from the national organization, and we respectfully comply with them and grasp what they are trying to achieve. And then there is a child who just wants to enjoy an hour with a dear old pony, and with a little ingenuity and determination, the two agendas can be complementary. All good!
But I realize as I consider this topic, that part of the reason I never climbed corporate ladders very well–at Fortune 100s, not for profits, or anywhere in between–is my fear of the kind of collective inertia that propagates myths, fads, and out-dated models. It’s hard enough for me to give up my own biases and wrong-headed notions (what very few I have, right?). I don’t have the chops to deal with treasured ignorance of institutional 
proportions.
I am not the person who in a group context can say the emperor’s tushie is showing, so I just tend to avoid empires as much as I can.
How do you cope with situations where the group is on the wrong path and content to remain there? Do you leave the group, back up a few steps, mutter to your besties? Say nothing and swerve the issue?
PS: The first batch of e-ARC’s will go out/has gone out this weekend for A Gentleman of Unreliable Honor. If you’d like one, email me at [email protected] and let me know what device you read on. I can’t send files to everybody who asks, all the time, but I will get out as many as I can.
I also prefer avoidance because I have learned over the years that it’s almost impossible to change some people, even when employing logic and science and verifiable facts. I did try to point out these errors but people don’t want to hear it (especially these days, it seems). My favorite place was as a “Subject Matter Expert” because I am good at having that type of knowledge and more than willing to help other people take advantage of my knowledge. But I was expected to only excel in that limited area and not know anything about anything else (which was very shortsighted on management’s part but seems to be the done thing). This preference did keep me from advancing also because you’re always supposed to go from Expert to Manager and I tried that twice and hated it both times.
Anyway, it’s better for me to just avoid. I am glad I’m retired because the workplace seems to be using these bogus philosophies more and more and it was grinding me down.
I forget where I came across the explanation for Groupthink, but it went something like this: Back in the day, if you didn’t get along with the other members of your hunter/gatherer tribe, you died. You woke up one morning and found the camp had been moved and nobody told you where. Whether zebras were faster than gazelles, or it last rained on Tuesday wasn’t half so important as getting along with your immediate neighbors.
You wouldn’t back down when Og said the zebra was faster–it’s not–so you were right, but now being right has left your life at risk. Next time, don’t be right. Be smart and nod at Og’s baloney.
And so we nod along, and hope we aren’t left behind when the camp moves. It’s a theory, anyway.
Generally speaking, when “the group is on the wrong path”, it means there is one member of the group who is driving the decision. Most people will go along to get along. I generally just step back and let them go their merry way. I don’t leave the group but then I also don’t voice my misgivings before or after.
I guess I am more terrified by being around a lot of zombies than I am of being banished. I’m sure though, that there are situations where a group means so much to me, that I would also just keep my head down and my backside tucked in, while I hoped the moment passed without disaster.
A point of clarification from my side. The committees I was referring to were those I was in when I was working and it was mandatory that I be there. Voluntary committee membership is different.
I avoid situations that you described at work. Everyone thinks their way is the best way and arguing is not productive. I let them figure it out on their own.
I let my daughter figure things out for herself as well…that has been a challenge for me as sometimes I can see the train wreck before she does.
Oh, you said a mouthful. One of many times that I’ve been glad to have so many siblings falls under the parent of an adult daughter category. My sibs told me to keep my mouth shut unless I could be constructive or supportive about the new boyfriend/the job/the career decision/the whatever. I can’t always follow it, but that has been great advice.
Amen
I got my ARC and I’m excited to dive in, Grace! Thanks so very much
Thank YOU, Make Kay!
I was the kid whose red-faced mother lead me to the kitchen to finish my supper when I asked what “AI” was, back in the day when my uncle was brand inspector for the Department of Agriculture. And I still manage to stick both feet in my mouth when asking why the emperor is wearing no clothes, because there might be a reason. No malice, just clueless.
I did find as a teacher that children do have different learning abilities or styles for a whole host of reasons. It isn’t as simple as they make it sound. My sister is on a committee who checks every child entering kindergarten for English language ability. It’s time consuming and not always super accurate if the child is traumatized by the entire experience. However, I don’t consider it a total myth. Some will learn English rapidly. Some won’t. The “so-called” kinesthetic learner may need to do the hokey-pokey every 10 minutes in order to concentrate.
I lost at least 2 jobs for not having the jargon. The SMART people need to see the formula. The discipline theory people want to hear the buzz words. Your barn obviously does what works. Kudos.
They do what works, and they don’t make a fuss about the little stuff. I am a champeen fusser once I get into cross-examination mode. A gift, it is not.
And for those of us not raised around farms: AI = artificial insemination.
I’m in the “leave the group” category, I’m afraid. Probably comes from being an only child.
By the way, I adore the Lord Julian series. A Gentleman of Unreliable Honour has arrived. I took a close look at the cover with all its story elements — so clever. But, did you know that the all-metal flute wasn’t invented until 1847? A typical 1816 flute would have been made of wood, probably with ivory rings, and only a few metal keys. Just so you know …
You caught me!
I vow and declare, I have not only the nicest readers in the world but some of the smartest. I actually did know about the metal flute being a Victorian invention–I have a degree in music history–but for these covers, I take liberties, and I get myself into trouble!
Most readers would not know what a wooden flute was, and silver is more interesting to photograph… I want my mystery covers to be a bit atmospheric, but that means they also need bright objects, so I went with the metal flute. And then created a Problem, because Her Grace is playing a flute in one scene, and do I explain that it’s wooden, or extend the anachronism I put right out loud on the cover? Do I bring this up in an author’s note at the back of the book? In the dear reader letter? ARGH.
We see which way I jumped, and I hope the story still worked for you. I do like the cover, but I’m never happy when I bend history to the point that it breaks for the readers. Her Grace might have to take up the violin!
Pingback: By the Numbers | Grace Burrowes | I believe in love.