No really! Okay, I'll admit it ... As a superbly intelligent, cool, fit and sophisticated cat, I have to concede that I am an expert at what I do. Even my closest cat friends and acquaintances have to agree (or I'll knock them into next week) that I am a legend. It makes for perfect sense then that I am an obvious candidate for promotion. But, no matter what I do, no matter how hard I work it hasn't happened yet.
WHY?
Yes, I know, life isn't fair, but, think of the possibilities .. could I further my exceptional career by helping out in the office; taking calls, writing and sending quotes, filing and all that weird human stuff. I have discounted this illustrating drawing stuff as it looks very intricate and frankly boring to do - I'd never get a chance to patrol the garden, and beat up some of those pesky critters... Also, I don't think I'd want to do it even if I could bring myself to touch one of those artificial mouse/mice things ... UGH!! I tried to eat one once, it was disgusting, and must have been dead a long time, as it was hard as a rock, black and rigamortis had obviously set in way back! Anyway, these daft human mouse clones are useless; they don't even have tails!
Anyway, it was whilst I was thinking about this, you know pondering the strange and frankly foolish criteria humans seem to use to decide who gets promotion: human likes, dislikes and strange unpredictable spontaneous human intuition seem to play a large part in the process - from what I've heard.
So, how do bosses choose who to promote?
Being a smart cat, I've done some research whilst pretending to flatten a crumpled copy of New Scientist. Turns out that three Italian researchers have been awarded the 2010 Ig Nobel prize in management for demonstrating mathematically that organisations would become more efficient if they promoted people at random! No, I am serious!
Not having met them, I'll be kind and grudgingly forgiving here: Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda and Cesare Garofalo of the University of Catania, Sicily, calculated how a pick-at-random promotion scheme compared with other more usual human methods for deciding the company pecking order. Apparently, they based their work on the Peter Principle – the notion that many people are promoted, sooner or later, to positions that drastically overreach their levels of competence. I was sure I had read this theory before, and checked ... Yes! The study by Phelan and Lin had hinted at this approach a few years earlier.
Phelan and Lin wanted to see whether, over the long haul, it payed best to promote people on their tested competence as a supposed measure of how 'good' an individual is at performing their assigned task. Or on an "up or out" basis (either you get promoted quickly or you get fired!), or by seniority (live a long time and, by that measure alone, you will work your way up the career cliff face).
As a control - I suppose you could call it, "this-is-as-bad-as-it-could-possibly-get alternative", they also looked at what happened when you promoted people completely at random.
Boy, did they get a surprise! Randomly promoted individuals "actually performed much better" than almost every other chosen method. Phelan and Lin were shocked, appalled and horrified by what they had discovered. Indeed, they were so appalled by what they had stumbled on, they duly hid the results in a mountain of words, and then went on to other things... As is so typical of humans, Pluchino, Rapisarda, and Garofalo would later, polish and publicize this discovery for the world to admire.
What a laugh!
It's even funnier as it's honestly true and I almost split my sides when I read that after this discovery, some chap based in Maastricht (of all places) deduced that an even larger improvement could be accomplished by randomly choosing the people who made the decisions to promote - anyone from the janitor to the CEO, and everyone in between.
Later, an even greater impact was observed when it was decided to choose external decision makers that had absolutely nothing to do with the organisation!!!
It's even funnier as it's honestly true and I almost split my sides when I read that after this discovery, some chap based in Maastricht (of all places) deduced that an even larger improvement could be accomplished by randomly choosing the people who made the decisions to promote - anyone from the janitor to the CEO, and everyone in between.
Later, an even greater impact was observed when it was decided to choose external decision makers that had absolutely nothing to do with the organisation!!!
Boy, you couldn't make this up!
Mmm ... all this means is that my chances are good, even great: with just a few candidates, my statistical chances of promotion are FANTASTIC! ... as long as they don't choose that next door flea-bag Squitts to carry out the decision making ... he can't tell his left paw from his right! But, that's a story for another day...
Yawn ... back to the world of work and prawny dreams.
Goodnight suckers...
Goodnight suckers...
ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZZ zzz zzz zzz zzz ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZZ zzz zzz zzz zzz ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZZ zz zz zz






