Four Razors for Organizational Behavior

A razor, in philosophy, is a maxim or principle that one can use to focus arguments and attention on avenues of thought. Razors generally guide thinking along lines that are most likely to prove fruitful. Perhaps the razor most widely recognized is Occam's razor: When searching for explanations of observed phenomena, the simpler explanations are more likely to be correct. But we can find razors beyond the realm of philosophy. In software development, for example, there is this: When a subsystem crashes unexpectedly, check for an unexpected input.

In human systems, razors have been used to help identify causes for undesirable behavior. Among these are:

• Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
• Heinlein (and erroneously, Napolean): Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

A general form for razors for organizational behavior

The general form of many razors in the field of human behavior is "Never attribute to X that which is adequately explained by Y." It reads simply and clearly enough, but the "never" it contains can make it difficult to accommodate. Humans, after all, are fiendishly clever. To allow for the odd situations that can arise I prefer this form:

It's risky to attribute to X that which is adequately explained by Y.

This form allows for some flexibility. You can follow the razor's advice most of the time, while recognizing that sometimes you must accept the risk and attribute to X that which is adequately explained by Y.

Four razors for organizational behavior

With that Perhaps the razor most widely recognized is Occam's Razor:
When searching for explanations of observed phenomena,
the simpler explanations are more likely to be correctflexible format in mind, I offer for your consideration these four razors for organizational behavior. In what follows I use the name Blair (him or her) to refer to the person whose behavior we're trying to explain.

It's risky to attribute to Malice that which can be explained by Incompetence.

The risk of attributing behavior to malice when incompetence would suffice is that it leads you to overestimate Blair's capacity to pursue her objective. That overestimate leads you to respond disproportionately. For example, if she lacks competence, your response can be milder and more accommodating than it would be if she were malicious.

It's risky to attribute to Incompetence that which can be explained by Ignorance.

Blair's ability to perform depends to some extent on knowledge acquired from education, training, or experience. Ignorance — lack of knowledge — can compromise performance in ways that are difficult to distinguish from incompetence. The response to incompetence is rather drastic — something like reassignment or replacement. The response to ignorance is less drastic — training or education. The risk of attributing Blair's poor performance to incompetence is that it requires that you take the more drastic action first.

It's risky to attribute to Ignorance that which can be explained by Greed.

When we attribute misbehavior to ignorance, our response is focused on Blair's education. When we attribute Blair's misbehavior to greed, our response is to act so as to limit Blair's ability to engage in deviant acquisitive action. The risk of misattribution in this case is that Blair's greed can harm the organization while we're busying ourselves try to educate her.

It's risky to attribute to Greed that which can be explained by Malice.

When malice is afoot, Blair's objective might not involve acquiring wealth or power. Indeed, he might be seeking an objective that could be self-destructive. Responding as if greed were the motive would suggest actions that protect against deviant acquisition. Responding as if malice were the motive would suggest actions that protect targets against more general kinds of harm. The greed response thus leaves some people unprotected.

Last words

With Malice (M), Incompetence (Ic), Ignorance (Ig), and Greed (G), I've constructed four razors: M/Ic, Ic/Ig, Ig/G, and G/M. Eight more are also possible: M/Ig, M/G, Ic/M, Ic/G, Ig/M, Ig/Ic, G/Ig, and G/Ic. Contemplate these possible razors. What are their risks?  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Devious Political Tactics:

Active Deceptions at Work

Among the vast family of workplace deceptions, those that involve presenting fiction as reality are among the most exasperating, because we sometimes feel fooled or gullible. Lies are the simplest example of this type, but there are others, and some are fiendishly clever.

Suppressing Dissent: I

In some groups, disagreeing with the majority, or disagreeing with the Leader, can be a personally expensive act. Here is Part I of a set of tactics used by Leaders who choose not to tolerate dissent.

Counterproductive Knowledge Work Behavior

With the emergence of knowledge-oriented workplaces, counterproductive work behavior is taking on new forms that are rare or inherently impossible in workplaces where knowledge plays a less central role. Here are some examples.

Narcissistic Behavior at Work: III

People who behave narcissistically tend to regard themselves as special. They systematically place their own interests and welfare ahead of anyone or anything else. In this part of the series we consider how this claimed specialness affects the organization and its people.

Career Opportunity or Career Trap: I

When we're presented with an opportunity that seems too good to be true, as the saying goes, it probably is. Although it's easy to decline free vacations, declining career opportunities is another matter. Here's a look at indicators that a career opportunity might be a career trap.

See also Devious Political Tactics and Devious Political Tactics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming September 4: Beating the Layoffs: I

If you work in an organization likely to conduct layoffs soon, keep in mind that exiting voluntarily before the layoffs can carry significant advantages. Here are some that relate to self-esteem, financial anxiety, and future employment. Available here and by RSS on September 4.

And on September 11: Beating the Layoffs: II

If you work in an organization likely to conduct layoffs soon, keep in mind that exiting voluntarily can carry advantages. Here are some advantages that relate to collegial relationships, future interviews, health, and severance packages. Available here and by RSS on September 11.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info