Susmit Basu's IBNLive Blog - The rewards of bad behaviour

I loved this article. It came out yesterday (4th Feb 2010) and I read it more than 5 times at a go (not because I din't understand, but I just loved the fact he used simple situations of life to show how interconnected they are with the worst ones.)

As time will pass of, this link will be lost in the world of internet and so, I want to make it a permanent in my directory!!

You can read it here or simply click on the title to reach its actual source!! ( I am sure if you like the article he would appreciate your comments). This story (just like my previous blog of ant and grasshopper) is a very good take on how the world evolves from the worst situations. 

The Rewards of Bad Behavior

"A Well Behaved Child". Remember your primary school report card with those remarks by the teacher? Did your parents' faces beam on seeing the card? Probably not. They were more likely fixated on the B in English Literature to be bothered about recognition for good behavior (their concern shifting to who the best tutor could be to turn that B into an A+ in the next term). On the other hand, the really naughty classmate who had not wreaked as much havoc over the term as he was expected to ended up with a large bar of Cadbury Fruit & Nut from the teacher and relieved expressions on his parents' faces.

When you returned home, it was your demanding, misbehaved sibling who got all the attention, who had to be coaxed and bribed into silence. If you were the content, quiet one, you maybe got a smile and a hug from your folks. Little more.

This is the paradox of bad behaviour. It is always, in a sense, rewarded in a very tangible way. Good behaviour, on the other hand, is mostly taken for granted. Rewards, if any, are intellectual (and rather intangible).

It doesn't end with children. Just as infants discover the profits of throwing tantrums (even with the inherent risk of punishment), a lot of the grown up world does too.

Take the work place. It happens often that part of the work is grudge work which no one in the team enjoys doing. There is always that one colleague who, just like everybody else, does not like it, but who, unlike the rest, makes a veritable mess of it. He is no nincompoop, so you find it incomprehensible as to how he manages to mess things up. You think to yourself that when the time comes, your diligence will pay off, but when less tedious opportunities open up, this colleague is more likely to get a shot at them. The explanation you may get could sound like: "you're good at what you do, but he is not. We're just trying to put him in a role that works for him."

Such contradictions play up in other, more serious settings, such as geo-political conflicts. Militancy has flared up in Afghanistan over the past year with a resurgent Taliban. A large part of the population suffers on account of underdevelopment and unemployment. Some of the unemployed, on the promise of a livelihood may have turned to militancy, but most have not. Yet, the solution being shopped around these days by the Afghan government, with the tacit backing of some nations whose troops are stationed there, is to 'reward' the militants with jobs and cash if they lay down their arms. What does this mean to those who remained unemployed but did not join the Taliban?

Similarly, the financial crisis showed that a big financial institution could get away with all sorts of bad behaviour. If they had lived like high rollers, taken all kinds of unmanageable risks (read: gambled) and lost big, they would not be left to their fate but rescued (read: rewarded) with bailouts. Those institutions which had remained prudent during the bubble years, waiting for the impending doom of the gamblers, could only rue their double misfortune - once for not having lived like the high rollers and again in seeing the house come to the losers' rescue.

People inherently abhor confrontation unless there are immediate gains or the threat of grievous losses out of it, and this gives rise to the tolerance for bad behaviour/ the tendency to reward it. Hence, when confronted by unreasonable and belligerent people, we are more likely to give in to their demands than try to reason with them. Indian political parties have long understood this and have frequently resorted to bad behaviour as a means to realize their political goals, and as a people, we have time and again, given in to their tantrums and in all likelihood will continue doing so.

But, more later. It's time to switch on that reality show where everyone's always in a catfight. It's too enticing! Plus, I do not like that person who's always polite and courteous. She makes things so boring. I'm definitely voting her out today.