Have you watched Pr. Barry Schwartz talk on the subject of Paradox of Choice
For management purposes, you need smart people, but how much? Considering
two otherwise equal candidates, you mostly pick up the smart one. Why? Because
he would successfully understand the unspoken rules of the profession and could at
least understand what he/she is supposed to be doing. But as the smartness/employer
curve increases she/he begins to question. At some cases, the subject can also effect
his/her co-workers. Chaos and the demand for better management might be the worst
nightmare of the managers. So smartness might be a merit, but should have some limits
for managability.
I think it is similar to Schwartz's arguement. As the number of available choices increase,
people become less happy after some treshold. So does managers' become as thier
employer's intelligence increase upon some other treshold.
YouTube - TEDTalks: Barry Schwartz (2005)
The thing is I think the reasoning behind is very similar for the following arguement.For management purposes, you need smart people, but how much? Considering
two otherwise equal candidates, you mostly pick up the smart one. Why? Because
he would successfully understand the unspoken rules of the profession and could at
least understand what he/she is supposed to be doing. But as the smartness/employer
curve increases she/he begins to question. At some cases, the subject can also effect
his/her co-workers. Chaos and the demand for better management might be the worst
nightmare of the managers. So smartness might be a merit, but should have some limits
for managability.
I think it is similar to Schwartz's arguement. As the number of available choices increase,
people become less happy after some treshold. So does managers' become as thier
employer's intelligence increase upon some other treshold.
Powered by ScribeFire.
