Chance, Humor, And Self-Importance

I was one of a hundred or so folks that Jon Husband mistakenly put into the cc line of a "changing email address" email. I thought nothing of it, aside from wondering why he was switching to gmail, when some spontaneous networking broke out among the implicit network of Friends of Jon.

The sad thing is, some dour types asked to be removed from the mildly interesting exchange going on, and some said worse. Euan Semple finds this "Hey, I'm an important business person; leave me out of this childish fooling around" attitude to be insufferable, in this context, and even worse, in business across the board:

[from A Serious Point About Levity]

This is an attitude I encounter all of the time in talking to businesses. There are those who even react badly to the "social" in Social Computing. Mucking around is frowned upon and there is an assumption that "business like" behaviour is the most appropriate and the most effective.

However, in direct contrast, I am more convinced that this is one of the more insidious mindsets in the workplace and one that is significantly curtailing the effectiveness of business.

The collusion behind "we don't do things like that around here" or "that is not the sort of thing we should be talking about in a work context" can be intimidatingly strong. And although it appears on the face of it to be a reasonable position to take when you think about it what are their motivations in saying these things? Is it really effective to curtail your conversations in the workplace to a very limited and closely controlled range of topics with which you are already familiar and comfortable? If you don't get to find about people through their whimsicality, their passions and even their prejudices then how are you going to be able to establish enough trust to be able to work with them effectively? What are they so afraid of? Chaos? Anarchy?

In so many ways this coercive attempt to control others' behaviour is more about maintaining power and control than it is to do with organisational effectiveness.

As we become ever more aware of the importance of creativity to business success, we should embrace spontanaiety, humor, and the serendipitous opportunity to do something new and different. Not only is it good for your health, something profoundly great may arise from it.

I often respond to the question "who do you work for?" by saying that I am unemployable. Behind the wisecrack is a deepseated aversion to self-important business tyros ruling in Cubeland, who manage to suck all the life out of life at work. Euan reminds me, again, how stultifying life inside can be.

Jeneane Sessum is even more unguarded in her concerns about people taking themsleves too seriously, and throwing cold water on the almost amorous contagion of ideas that can arise in these chance meetings:

[from Rapid Withdrawl and The Case for Shutting Up. No, Not You. YOU.]

Now, there is nothing wrong with saying, hey, could you take me off this list? Whatever the reason, that's obviously one path to be taken upon receipt of what you perceive as some (time consuming?) email exchanges.

But there's MORE RIGHT WITH shutting the fuck up while allowing others to take the opportunity to connect with people they know, and meet people they don't know, to bring a split second of joy or a smile, a spark, maybe even an opportunity to learn something extraordinary from an ordinary moment.

[...]

For the love of humanity, can we not agree to make one mouse click to delete what might seem annoying rather than throwing boiling water on the dogs of the Internet as they passionately hump their species into continued existence?

Can we not agree to bow out quietly without ruining the exquisite moment of ejaculative procreation?

I think that one of the most basic insights that arose from my most life-threatening episode -- a brain aneurysm a few years ago -- is a sense of the transitoriness of life, and, as a result, a desire to take advantage of the opportunities that Lady Luck throws at us along the way.

Those sternly businesslike types who demanded off of the merry-go-round that Jon's email had sent spinning probably thought that they were trying to make the most of their day, true, but they missed a chance to goof off with a group of very interesting folks.

Basically, it boils down to a belief in playfulness, and an openness to the unusual and random. If you think you have all the answers, you won't be interested in running through the fields with a bunch of wild kids, searching for new questions.

tags: jon+husband, jeneane+sessum, euan+semple, creativity, serendipity, randomness, play, cc+line+goofs

Comments

[Constance Reader]

I have also encountered this censorship impulse in office environments, but it seems to have gotten out of control. Instead of heading off problems, it causes them, because people spend so much time monitoring their their speech and smoothing it out to conform to what they consider "professional" and "diplomatic", that it loses all meaning. I can not begin to recount the number of situations which went from difficult to heinous because the person responsible for directing improvement unintentionally enabled negative action or behavior, because they were too busy speaking professionally for the listener to hear what they needed to hear: this is wrong, this does not work, this will not work, you fucked up royally, these timelines are not based on reality/reality does not match your timeline.

I work in the contract pharmaceutical research industry, that last one bites us in the butt all the time. A client's utopian timeline smacks Gantt chart-first into reality and a project director/manager's client-centric active listening techniques fail to impress on the client that their timeline is not feasible and must be revised. What the client hears is that if they ask firmly enough or work their requests just right, they will magically unleash our heretorfore unrecognized ability to alter the space-time continuum in order to meet the timeline they based on water sprites and unicorns, not data.

You wonder why your prescription drugs cost so much? Now you know. That's Big Pharma -- proudly reinventing the wheel on a daily basis. A flying wheel. That sings and tells fortunes. And makes great TV commercials.

[paul@eucap]

Stowe: I think of it as two opposite sides of the creative and corporate class divide. Different cultures, different value systems, different purpose. One creates, one admistrates.

Corporate classes have all the answers they need to administrate a business. The bigger the business the bigger the kudos. Master Business Administrators.

Your best revenge is exiting a startup at a multimillion valuation. The only time corporate classes pay attention.

Have no doubt the "sternly businesslike types" miss out big time, even by their standards.