There is a scene from the movie Apollo 13 that has stuck with me. Chaos has broken loose as the team of engineers debates the best way to get the astronauts back to earth. Loren Dean playing John Aaron snaps clarity from the jaws of chaos by pointing out that any chance of survival hinges on maintaining battery power, which is quickly waning.

It is an exchange that is short and sharp, but you can tell that very quickly the focus has shifted to absolutely the right area.

The reason this stands out for me is that it is an example where the person who actually has “the answer” is able to convey it to others, and the others are actually listening. This is a phenomenon that I would suggest is rarer than it should be. Understandably, it is tough to replicate because it demands that:

1 – there is an absolute answer;

2 – someone actually knows it;

3 – others listen; and

4 – others believe the person who is telling them the answer.

I hope to focus this blog on examples when the (objectively) correct information makes it through. Yes, there will be times that it doesn’t, and we can certainly discuss those, too. I hope to find a suitable tag/title for this moment; something like “moment of truth,” maybe M.O.T. The quest for the John Aaron moment is on!

Tags: Tags: Apollo 13, authority, expertise, Negotiations —

CBC Radio One’s The Current today featured Chris Hunter, a bomb defuser who has written accounts of his travels.

http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2008/200802/20080227.html

He talks of being able to get a detailed confession and explanation out of one of the terrorist bomb “artists” by stroking his ego and calling the bombs “masterpieces.” I would argue that he created a very strong “in-group” bond with the bomber. “You see, we are alike. We are the only ones who understand your talent…” The fellow-artist bond trumped the more natural “out-group” identity of terrorist vs. Western crusader. Hunter puts it down to ego; I disagree.

Also, Mr. Hunter is fairly straightforward about how Canada could be under imminent threat of a homeland attack. This is due to the pattern of terrorist organizations attacking countries that display internal division (e.g. conflict over relevant foreign policy). The natural example would be the attacks in Spain and England that followed debate over whether or not to engage in Iraq, etc.

One would hope that given his degree of credibility that he exhibited in the interview–and presumably through the book–that this is an objective statement, rather than a soft “plug” from someone who, as counter-terrorist consultant, could benefit greatly from a perceived threat. I do not presume to say that Mr. Hunt is overstating the situation for his own good, but the temptation must be great.

Tags: Tags: In-group/out-group, motivations —

• September 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008