By Ben Shenton
DO you have a pencil and a sheet of paper to hand? If you do, draw a square on the paper. Then draw another square that overlaps the corner and shade in the overlapping part (see picture). The first square represents how you see yourself. The second square represents how others see you. The shaded part is the degree to which your view of yourself is accurate.
With this knowledge, do the exercise again and consider the degree that your view of yourself matches the views of others towards you. Perhaps show it to others and see what they think.
The point is that how others see you will never exactly match how you see yourself, and you need to be aware of this. At extremes, people can fall in love with themselves, believe they are better than they are, and suffer the inevitable fall from grace.
Others can be much more loved, capable and respected than they believe, and it is nice when life enables them to fulfil their potential. With this knowledge you can adjust your behaviour to make your life more fulfilling and productive.
The above exercise does not just apply to individuals, it can also be applied to companies, organisations, governments and countries.
How much would the boxes overlap if you were to do this exercise in respect of, for example, British Airways, the BBC, Jersey Hospice and the Jersey government (I think the result for Hospice may be very different to the others, which is why it is included). British Airways consider themselves “the world’s favourite airline”, the BBC the most trusted news service, and the Jersey government… I’m not actually sure what their ambition is. How do you see them compared to how they see themselves?
I point this out because the failure to appreciate how you are perceived is a weakness, as you will constantly act on false premises. It demonstrates that you believe your own hype, you consider other points of view invalid when they are not, and you may be susceptible to groupthink.
Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people makes irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform or the belief that dissent is impossible. It is characterised by a tendency to accept a viewpoint or conclusion that represents a perceived group consensus, even if individual members may not believe it to be valid or optimal.
If you fail to see what is actually in front of you then, quite frankly, you will not perform to your best ability because you will never be dealing with the real issues.
It was a very clever man, who sadly is no longer with us, who pointed this out many decades ago, drawing the squares to impart some knowledge to me. I still remember him calling me into his office, like it was yesterday, to mentor rather than manage.
I thought of this when I read of Jane Platt’s JFSC letter.
If I was answering criticism of an organisation that had been decimated by data leaks, and perhaps data loss, I would not have written “based on the evidence we have available, (we) have not been able to substantiate them [the complaints]”.
I doubt any of those who had input into her professional response even considered that some could interpret this sentence in this way. In almost ten years of writing for the JEP, I have realised how difficult it is to anticipate how my words will be interpreted.
Jane Platt writes “the JEP’s characterisation of our organisation is not one we recognise”. Presumably, the view voiced by those looking in, and voicing concern, is therefore either wrong in her opinion or does not exist.
Perfectly overlapping boxes in a world where this does not happen, the JFSC is certainly unique.
I have actually had a very good relationship with the JFSC over the years, helping them avoid some very nasty car crashes, so I am very much writing this in the aim of enlightenment rather than any malice.
Over 30 years have passed since I whistle blew on a major bank fraud, and had to rebuild my career as a result.
I wrote last week that I, rather worryingly, would recommend that people turn a blind eye rather than do the right thing due to the lack of whistleblowing protections and the small island consequences. Since the article, people who have whistle blown and suffered the consequences have contacted me to tell me about their experiences as they had empathy with my story, even someone who had to leave the Island as a result. However, not one commissioner or anyone from the JFSC has ever contacted me or taken any interest in my personal experiences.
My recommendation to Jane Platt would be to draw the boxes on behalf of the JFSC, and then take actions to make the JFSC a better regulator.
This advice also goes out to other organisations where public perception is poor, many of which I have highlighted over the years without seeing any improvement. It seems that the public know who you are, but the management don’t…
-
Ben Shenton is a senior investment director. He is a former politician, Senator, who held positions such as minister, chair of Public Accounts Committee, and chair of Scrutiny. He also assists a number of local charities on an honorary basis, and can be a bit gobby.
