Yet the CIA used these tactics effectively to prevent groups from achieving their aims.
I’ve heard the CIA quote a few times and it feels reasonable (matches my worldview) but wondering if anyone’s actually checked that it was really effective.
Anecdotally I’ve found that it’s generally on point.
I think a lot of these tactics are a form of ego-pandering that distracts people from what their organizations are meant to achieve (elaborate speeches, doing things through “proper channels” that serves to give more people a voice, etc.). I’ve been in several organizations where decisions take forever to be made, circulating between individuals and committees with no one really holding a final say in making the decision, waiting for some form of consensus to arrive (which it never truly does). This again just gives people more and more of an excuse to insert themselves in discussions that are happening often to the detriment of actually moving things along.
I’ve heard the CIA quote a few times and it feels reasonable (matches my worldview) but wondering if anyone’s actually checked that it was really effective.
Anecdotally I’ve found that it’s generally on point.
I think a lot of these tactics are a form of ego-pandering that distracts people from what their organizations are meant to achieve (elaborate speeches, doing things through “proper channels” that serves to give more people a voice, etc.). I’ve been in several organizations where decisions take forever to be made, circulating between individuals and committees with no one really holding a final say in making the decision, waiting for some form of consensus to arrive (which it never truly does). This again just gives people more and more of an excuse to insert themselves in discussions that are happening often to the detriment of actually moving things along.