4 ms·

What if that voice comes packed in bad clothing, smelly and is full of grammar mistakes? Because that's how an order without credentials would feel like, when t

by usrusr 3y ago

What if that voice comes packed in bad clothing, smelly and is full of grammar mistakes? Because that's how an order without credentials would feel like, when the rituals of signature verification are established as expected form. The correct reply to an underling who goes all sir-yes-sir without checking would be "do you consider me so unimportant that you don't think it worth your precious time to verify that I actually am who I claim to be?". It would certainly have to be a cultural adaption initiated from the top. If subordinates are expected to fill in for whatever diligence those higher up lack, it won't work, no matter where. It's true, I don't know Japan, but I suspect that they might have it much easier to adapt than western pretend-buddy orgs.

beagle3 3y ago
Not really. In those cultures, just like in armies everywhere, authority comes from the boss/commander and they can override their previous instructions at any point (and many do at some point). There’s often a distinction in armies between “illegal command” issued by a commander, which one has to obey (or risk disciplinary action) and “blatantly illegal command” which must be disobeyed. An example of the former would be “keep your post for 20 hours straight” (where regulations limit a shift to e.g. 12 hours). An example of the latter would be “cut the limbs off other members of your platoon”. An army setting is a much better model of some cultures. They are not as bad, but if taken ad absurdum they would look like an army setting.
- usrusr 3y ago
  Armies are a good example of authority clearly coming from the role, not from the person, and roles inseparably tied to a lot of expected formal behavior. In an impersonation-hardened army (or corporation), you simply wouldn't make it beyond the very lowest rank unless you demonstrate flawless authentication on both receiver and sender side. Just like you wouldn't make it badly dressed.
  - beagle3 3y ago
    Except .. there’s no effective authentication protocol in place to verify that a specific person is indeed in a specific role (or is indeed person they claim to be).
    - usrusr 3y ago
      Sure, that's the gap that needs to be filled. In the age of deep fakes even more urgently than before. But which work cultures will find it easier to effectively deploy countermeasures? Informal ones, where everybody acts like first names buddies all the way to the CEO, where they believe they are invulnerable because all those pretend-equal underlings are invited to speak up when they sense something fishy? What if they don't sense anything? Or formal environments, where authentication tools could be systematically added to the preexisting and deeply entrenched set of rituals? "That guy is not just acting like a colonel, the device we now all have to hold while saluting confirms that the biometric checksum embedded in his uniform insignia matches and is signed with central command keys". Yes, that protocol is not in place, but if it was introduced it would actually work. Now try the same in an informal environment where everything is supposed to be solved through good personal relations. The exact same tools, deployed in a buddy-org, would only ever get used retroactively, for pushing blame down the hierarchy.
      - beagle3 3y ago
        I actually think it will be the informal cultures who will have an easier time integrating it. Because pockets of “Sir, I recognize you are my boss but you still need to do this properly through the regular channels” are, in my experience, more common in a non-authoritative setting then in an authoritative one (my familiarity is mostly with armies, not with Asian societies). And if these bubbles do exist, I think it is easier for them to expand in a disorganized, distributed manner; unlike an authoritative society where everything like this must properly flow top down.
        usrusr 3y ago
        Heh, "pockets of correct behavior" is an interesting perspective, truly reads like an insider view, I certainly would not have put it like that. The problem in the informal culture is that insisting on formality (the authentication check can never not be a formality) is perceived as a signal "they don't like me". That's a huge incentive for cutting corners, both up and down the hierarchy. In an environment that prides itself in formality, it's at least possible to sell going through the motions as a sign of respect. The failure mode I'm talking about is not what's happening the day the boss doesn't have their keys (that's challenging in any environment, and certainly not easy on the authoritative end of the spectrum), but how likely it is that the absent keys would even come up, how often a check will actually happen. Lack of procedures is the defining quality of informal organizations. When it's routine, the orderly refusal is not so much "but you have to do this properly" (underling ordering boss around) but "you know that I can't do that without.." (underling showing off being a good underling)

by usrusr 3y ago

beagle3 3y ago

Not really. In those cultures, just like in armies everywhere, authority comes from the boss/commander and they can override their previous instructions at any point (and many do at some point). There’s often a distinction in armies between “illegal command” issued by a commander, which one has to obey (or risk disciplinary action) and “blatantly illegal command” which must be disobeyed. An example of the former would be “keep your post for 20 hours straight” (where regulations limit a shift to e.g. 12 hours). An example of the latter would be “cut the limbs off other members of your platoon”. An army setting is a much better model of some cultures. They are not as bad, but if taken ad absurdum they would look like an army setting.

usrusr 3y ago
Armies are a good example of authority clearly coming from the role, not from the person, and roles inseparably tied to a lot of expected formal behavior. In an impersonation-hardened army (or corporation), you simply wouldn't make it beyond the very lowest rank unless you demonstrate flawless authentication on both receiver and sender side. Just like you wouldn't make it badly dressed.
- beagle3 3y ago
  Except .. there’s no effective authentication protocol in place to verify that a specific person is indeed in a specific role (or is indeed person they claim to be).
  - usrusr 3y ago
    Sure, that's the gap that needs to be filled. In the age of deep fakes even more urgently than before. But which work cultures will find it easier to effectively deploy countermeasures? Informal ones, where everybody acts like first names buddies all the way to the CEO, where they believe they are invulnerable because all those pretend-equal underlings are invited to speak up when they sense something fishy? What if they don't sense anything? Or formal environments, where authentication tools could be systematically added to the preexisting and deeply entrenched set of rituals? "That guy is not just acting like a colonel, the device we now all have to hold while saluting confirms that the biometric checksum embedded in his uniform insignia matches and is signed with central command keys". Yes, that protocol is not in place, but if it was introduced it would actually work. Now try the same in an informal environment where everything is supposed to be solved through good personal relations. The exact same tools, deployed in a buddy-org, would only ever get used retroactively, for pushing blame down the hierarchy.
    - beagle3 3y ago
      I actually think it will be the informal cultures who will have an easier time integrating it. Because pockets of “Sir, I recognize you are my boss but you still need to do this properly through the regular channels” are, in my experience, more common in a non-authoritative setting then in an authoritative one (my familiarity is mostly with armies, not with Asian societies). And if these bubbles do exist, I think it is easier for them to expand in a disorganized, distributed manner; unlike an authoritative society where everything like this must properly flow top down.
      - usrusr 3y ago
        Heh, "pockets of correct behavior" is an interesting perspective, truly reads like an insider view, I certainly would not have put it like that. The problem in the informal culture is that insisting on formality (the authentication check can never not be a formality) is perceived as a signal "they don't like me". That's a huge incentive for cutting corners, both up and down the hierarchy. In an environment that prides itself in formality, it's at least possible to sell going through the motions as a sign of respect. The failure mode I'm talking about is not what's happening the day the boss doesn't have their keys (that's challenging in any environment, and certainly not easy on the authoritative end of the spectrum), but how likely it is that the absent keys would even come up, how often a check will actually happen. Lack of procedures is the defining quality of informal organizations. When it's routine, the orderly refusal is not so much "but you have to do this properly" (underling ordering boss around) but "you know that I can't do that without.." (underling showing off being a good underling)