Drunkenness of Hierarchy v.02e

Referring to my previous post this is not blaming but trying to point out things that usually are not being checked. 

A leader might think that he's in control of his subordinates but there's a side where the subordinates are the ones in control of him. The motive is to have a strong and stable hierarchy so that they could have a stable income. However when they feed the boss with so much ego that he became so difficult and so political, that's a sign that he has lost individual self. 

Because a hierarchy of society is not higher than the Truth, the Truth is accessible and equally as intense in all layers of society from the top to the bottom. The spirit of the Truth is to permeates all fractal. 

So you'd know that you'd be seeing a toxic hierarchy when:

1. The hierarchy is more important than the Truth

2. Truth at its best / purest form could only be accessed by selected few

3. It's hard to convey the Truth to other people without facing retaliation. 

I might be wrong about this, some leaders may be essentially a liar as an individual. But generally I believe that human beings wants to experience life, reality, and the Truth, not confined within the interest of their hierarchy. Also I might be wrong that the subordinates were ill-intended, no they might just be insecure (initially) and then had become too invested to go back anymore. 

The target is, to be able to solve the problem for everybody, why? because one man's scarcity is another man's risk, the inclination to injustice is fractal in presence. Just because we were at the top of the hierarchy doesn't mean that we'd be free from depression. If the hierarchy is toxic, that means we as being on the top were likely oblivious to the leash our subordinates were putting on us (usually its psychological/our psychological weakness not being put forward to be fixed). Being able to be fluid while still in the context of the Truth is required for us to face the problem, articulate them, and figure out how to massacre them in the most effective and efficient formation. 

The Truth is above the Hierarchy

----------------------------------

The solution to insecurity is diversification, it's reasonable to be insecure when you're only attached to few sources of income. Again keep in check that the insecurity wouldn't spread or escalated into some bad policies, also damn, the bad policies could come in the form of unwritten consensus and this is a problem to scrutinize (it could give a sense of belonging too which is even crazier).

Here in Indonesia the Government under President Jokowi together with the Legislative has created an OMNIBUS constitution which then give birth to 2 small enterprise specific rules PP 7 and PP 8, 2021. Under these making a company in the difficult way is a thing of the past, and anyone including employees like those portrayed as helpless and powerless always in the media were empowered. They could create companies of their own and the regulation arranged for their "grace period" in order for them to become competitive enough. 

I'm telling you guys even me myself has already a company of my own and the government is waiting to give companies like mine facilities, tax breaks, priorities, credits, assets, and other benefits. 

Lesson acknowledged

When a big counter momentum is hitting us, blame game is only for instant results otherwise don't.

Like every action has the opposite reaction, upon every good deeds you must identify for bad inclinations

I hate that the state of the world is in such a blatant crisis, but it must be the cost of our achievements that have exceeded historical expectations. We shouldn't let negative emotions overwhelmed us, we shouldn't be discouraged. This time we must recover, come back even stronger with a better budget, better anticipation. 

So everybody let's make things even better :)

The readiness element v.02

 I think our current way of remuneration is kind of "painting the wide brush", we should separate the "always ready" element and the "particular job achievements" elements from it. 

It's logical that a lot of companies already do this but I just want to point it out plus my logic that it's definitely better:

Employees being there for you always ready - cost A

Employees managed to finish a particular job - cost B

These two have their own characteristics, variability, requirements. So bundling these two into one "Salary" would give rise to discontentment. Well of course as a human being we should negotiate, and we should negotiate with articulation and accuracy, as well as diligence or thoroughness. But, this being taken into account in general would make a difference. 

---------------------

Some employees compare their salaries among themselves, the people who are always ready would be able to be understood by the people who are more into "just in time" kind of attitude or if they were both, the differences between their income would be understandable and would not cause passive aggressive protests or something like that. 

And please don't do passive aggressive protest especially if you never negotiated for your sake. 

Audit Opinions v.02

First of all I got to say that auditing is an arduous journey it is only natural that the opinion is totally worth it. So let's have more tiers of opinions. 

I think that credit institutions, government institutions requiring the best audit opinion for everybody is low key disrespectful. It is unrealistic even for an honest business to get it perfect, so for you to require your client to have the best audit opinion all the time is infuriating to me. 

Let's have more tiers of Audit opinions, the best being the most comparable and reasonable, next rather unique in certain areas, next locally comparable but not globally scalable (in terms of understandability), next reasonable but "different", next "different" and unreasonable, etc etc. Like, I don't know I'm not an expert but I hope my point of view is conveyed. 

So again the point is to have a greater room of understanding for we want things to be realistic and true. We want to be able to rely on the audit reports more. Therefore expecting companies to always be right standardwise needs to be curbed. I bet it has gained bad momentum on auditees (incentiviced the inclination to manipulate results). 

I just want to address a supposed problem, it might not exist but isn't it unrealistic to assume so?

It's only normal that snakes exists in the garden of eden, but if we acted like they don't exist not only we're letting them to tease us, we are also letting them to bite us. 

I'm not saying that we can't rely on audit opinions now, no absolutely I'm not saying that. I'm saying that as we scale things up let's acknowledge that not all snowballs are heading towards the productive direction.

Anonymous voice

 I think there's utility in giving anonymous voice to mid tier criminals

Articulation vs Neuroticism v.02

Having an environment that facilitates debates, discussions, objective criticisms would improve the spirit of articulation. Articulation in turn, would optimize the discussion experiences and so on and so on. Being able to articulate your feelings and concerns would help the moment you were faced with "danger" or potential dangers because articulated thoughts are stored in a form of words, in configurations that are compact and harmonious with your emotions. So instead of being overwhelmed with 10,000 danger signals, you'd quickly recognize and manage some of them, so now you'd only be overwhelmed by 5,000 signals. 

Even though a person is relatively neurotic compared to others, but talents related to articulations would probably make use of that negative feelings into all kinds of strength and those would be unique to that person, an "evolution". For example sensitivity to financial problems articulated would translate to the talent of prompt identification of similar problems experienced by others. People like that would be able to accurately solve problems using financial means, including problems that wouldn't usually be solved using the financial angle. Including problems that were not shown by the said people but timely identified by the empathetic circuit related to the amygdala.

Dignity v.03

If we keep on solving problems there would always going to be high times. 

But dignity comes and goes, and once you get your hands on your own dignity, it's no longer proper dignity and you'd never be satisfied with that inferior dignity

Dignity is in the hands of other people. Control what you can control, leave what you're not supposed to control alone. Your dignity is for other people to decide. 

So don't pay attention to it, it's a state not a reward. Sometimes it's based on lies, sometimes it's based on the Truth. You are not supposed to have anything to do with it. Be satisfied with yourself

-------------------------

People might say, if we live in dangerous environment we couldn't afford to think like this. I'd answer why? wouldn't thinking like this provide unique point of view? When everybody were wrong about whether the volcano going to errupt or not, a person who knew something different would definitely contribute to the richness of point of views. Wouldn't a person who won't sway into herd bias be contributing even more substantially? that's what I'm saying. 

I think the evolution was not about utility but about trauma. Neuroticism causes people to be hostile or very sensitive about dignity to the point they're willing to severely hurt someone else. 

--------------------------

Neuroticism is not always bad, it could be bad just like any other traits but it could also be good. Like a neurotic parents would observe the wound of their children, some wounds are normal some are actually tetanus. If you live in a disaster area being neurotic means being conservative, but again it cames with some downsides and we should address it instead of denying it. 

Evolution could be epigenetic wise could be the whole genes I don't know, but as human beings we can use our consciousness to actually contemplate and make things better and even drive future evolutions.