3 ms·
The OP said "Org X has property P." You responded with "Org Y does not have property P, and Org Y is like Org X." I claim the second half of that - that thing
by endtime 15y ago
The OP said "Org X has property P." You responded with "Org Y does not have property P, and Org Y is like Org X." I claim the second half of that - that things that are true about the IDF are likely to be true about the US military - cannot be assumed. Even ignoring the significant cultural differences between the two countries, there are differences in the demographics the militaries themselves are composed of.
- JabavuAdams 15y agoSo at the risk of pedantry ... I was making a claim about large organizations that depend on loyalty, not even specifically military organizations. So, the specific difference between military organizations and cultures are neatly excluded. The pattern (of which I gave a specific example) is: Person X in large org Y claims something is true for ALL members of org Y, based on X's personal experience. I submit that humans being what they are and organizations being what they are, it's more likely that there are bad behaviours that are tolerated in sub-organizations of Y even if they violate the officially stated rules. TL;DR Without perfect knowledge it's better to assume that something somewhere is going wrong than to assume that nothing anywhere is going wrong. A lot of science, engineering and process control basically boils down to this. Why do we forget it when dealing with human systems?
- endtime 15y agoBehavior/discipline will necessarily be noisier in a conscripted organization than in a self-selected volunteer organization. I don't think you can generalize that away.