Post by philiprosenthal on Jul 16, 2006 5:37:02 GMT
Can scandals be explained by herd behaviour?
I found a most interesting site which investigates the theory that much human group behaviour is similar to animal herd instinct. It is applied to a number of fields including changes in the stock market, pop music, and what is especially relevant to us - scandals. The argument is that people tend to just follow the crowd and respond to the mood of the rest of the herd. Very few will ever venture to move in any other direction. If anyone does, they are punished with all sorts of grunts, frowns and social ostracism.
www.socionomics.net/enron_scandal.html
In analysising the Enron and accounting scandals in the USA, the analysts look at them from the perspective that:
i. When the mood was good, people invested in high-risk projects.
ii. When the mood was good, CEO's could get away with bad business practices because no one questioned them.
iii. When the mood turned bad, people started asking questions.
iv. After a long time of bad mood, those questions eventually resulted in the bad practices being exposed.
I think this may help us reconcile how scandals managed to happen in a revival environment. Basically, during the rapid growth period everyone in Maranatha, His People, MorningStar was eurphoric - and few if any thought to question what was going on. Thus leaders could get away with more and more questionable practices. When the mood turned bad - questions were asked and the shaky practices exposed.
It would appear the organisations follow a mood cycle which swings up and down. Now it is in a down time, so all the bad practices are getting exposed. 1980's was good mood for marantha. Late 1990s was bad mood. Mid 1990s was good mood for MorningStar. Late 1980s and 1990s was good mood for His People. Now is bad mood for both.
Reforms and conflicts tend to happen in bad mood times. Usually they are impossible to happen in good mood times because no one listens to the dissenters.
Application 1: Lets push through the repentance and reforms during this bad mood time and make them permanent by writing into by-laws, constitutions, structure, Bible school etc - before the next good mood time hits and everyone goes euphoric and stops listening again.
Application 2: The theory can explain why people go along with and rationalise unethical behaviour in ministry even when they know it is wrong. The peer-pressure to move along with the herd is massive. Thus, chose your herd carefully.
Application 3: The scandals are not happening now. They have been accumulating for years hidden away. What has changed is that the people are developing an attitude of asking questions.
Application 4: FactNet in a sense is an 'alternative herd' to EveryNation hierachy. Within FactNet there is also a lot of peer pressure to 'go along with the herd'. Thus, statements may not always be balanced and fair.
Application 5: As Christians, we need to try resist the basic instinct to go along with herd whether in EveryNation or FactNet and instead to try follow Christ.
I found a most interesting site which investigates the theory that much human group behaviour is similar to animal herd instinct. It is applied to a number of fields including changes in the stock market, pop music, and what is especially relevant to us - scandals. The argument is that people tend to just follow the crowd and respond to the mood of the rest of the herd. Very few will ever venture to move in any other direction. If anyone does, they are punished with all sorts of grunts, frowns and social ostracism.
www.socionomics.net/enron_scandal.html
In analysising the Enron and accounting scandals in the USA, the analysts look at them from the perspective that:
i. When the mood was good, people invested in high-risk projects.
ii. When the mood was good, CEO's could get away with bad business practices because no one questioned them.
iii. When the mood turned bad, people started asking questions.
iv. After a long time of bad mood, those questions eventually resulted in the bad practices being exposed.
I think this may help us reconcile how scandals managed to happen in a revival environment. Basically, during the rapid growth period everyone in Maranatha, His People, MorningStar was eurphoric - and few if any thought to question what was going on. Thus leaders could get away with more and more questionable practices. When the mood turned bad - questions were asked and the shaky practices exposed.
It would appear the organisations follow a mood cycle which swings up and down. Now it is in a down time, so all the bad practices are getting exposed. 1980's was good mood for marantha. Late 1990s was bad mood. Mid 1990s was good mood for MorningStar. Late 1980s and 1990s was good mood for His People. Now is bad mood for both.
Reforms and conflicts tend to happen in bad mood times. Usually they are impossible to happen in good mood times because no one listens to the dissenters.
Application 1: Lets push through the repentance and reforms during this bad mood time and make them permanent by writing into by-laws, constitutions, structure, Bible school etc - before the next good mood time hits and everyone goes euphoric and stops listening again.
Application 2: The theory can explain why people go along with and rationalise unethical behaviour in ministry even when they know it is wrong. The peer-pressure to move along with the herd is massive. Thus, chose your herd carefully.
Application 3: The scandals are not happening now. They have been accumulating for years hidden away. What has changed is that the people are developing an attitude of asking questions.
Application 4: FactNet in a sense is an 'alternative herd' to EveryNation hierachy. Within FactNet there is also a lot of peer pressure to 'go along with the herd'. Thus, statements may not always be balanced and fair.
Application 5: As Christians, we need to try resist the basic instinct to go along with herd whether in EveryNation or FactNet and instead to try follow Christ.