"Removing Permission To Think" Has This Occurred With Your Job?

Late last year DH and I were listening to the BBC (radio) interview a corporate psychologist who was concerned about the growing trend within orginisations to remove the discretion or "permission to think" from all but the most senior personnel. He cited the Medical, Retail, Finance industries as examples of orgs that do this, amongst others. He said that 20 years ago workers still had a fair degree of discretion and control over how they did their job. Nowdays that's been taken away resulting in high stress and low morale amongst workers.

We have recently experienced this as DH resigned from his last role with a bank. He had been a banker for over 20 years and saw many changes but the worst was the removal of the choice in how he did his job and micro-managing. Once upon a time, as a manager, he had a lending discretion; he would meet with a person who wanted a loan, analyse their situation and decide (within limits) whether they could have a loan. Nowadays not only has that stopped but he has been told he has to read from a script "Good afternoon, my name is.... and would you like fries with that?" Well, virtually. He can't even choose to face a customer during a home loan interview anymore... he has to face the computer screen and fill out the online forms while talking to the customer to save time.... oh and every 10 minutes must be accounted for and he has no control over his diary. Total removal of permission to think has driven my DH into depression and anxiety to the point that he can no longer work in the finance industry.

Has your industry experienced this phenomenom? Here is the place to vent.

Yes, pretty similar to your DH. All my admin/office hours to be accounted for, but we still have free thought and permission to dream up new ideas and put them into action. But slowly I am seeing the changes. I work for a community organization as a aged and disability program manager.

This is why I couldn't stay in retail - the scripting!

And why we were rejected for a mortgage application: the mortgage advisor and the manager said that they would lend to us, would lend more than the computer said (which we didn't need), but as "computer said no" they had to go with it (because I didn't have 3 months' worth of payslips).

DH is very dissatisfied with all the computer stuff at work - they don't want a thinking engineer, they want a monkey who can push buttons. And it annoys him.

It's also why I'm now a bit dissatisfied with work: I need to write my own scripts and stick to them. I can't go off on a tangent. I plan them as loosly as possible because I hate having to tell people their questions are off-script so I won't answer them.

I'm a chemistry teacher who has included the Napoleanic wars, science-fiction films and religious festivities in recent classes (albeit briefly when no-one was watching). I don't get how science can be taught in isolation and to a script without killing enthusiasm for the subject.

Then we wonder why countries whose industry leaders do think do better than we do in the world market.

Dh's work is going through this now, and it is sending everyone there batty!

Theres no trust in staff, theres no responsility unless the bosses say they are responsible (even when they shouldnt be).

I had to laugh, a couple of months ago it was decreed that the GM had to be present at every stocktake for every department.

Dh is in hospitality, he and his boss have always been responsible for the menu (for instance), but now they are told what they are to prepare, how, and everything else.

Its sad how things have changed over the years. Older generations wonder why people dont stay in the one job, one profession all their working lives. But when there is no moral, no trust, nothing to keep people why would you stay?

I have had a few different retail jobs and the only one where i felt scripted was in a footwear outlet. We had to greet a customer within 30 secs we had questions we had to ask every customer, towards the end i felt like a computer. I left that job and have mine now. When i first started we had our scripted things we had to say but now i do what i want. I ask all the appropriate questions when necessary and not at each and every customer and my boss is happy with my performance. Obviously if a customer is paying with credit they don't want cash out, if they have a green bag they more than likely don't want a box/paper bag and asking each and every customer if they wanted to recharge their phones soon had us being abused and told off as if they wanted phone credit they would ask themselves! :rolleyes:

i think anyone in a call centre will be exposed to this - i left my previous job because it got beyond ridiculous. if you didn't work your sales pitch in a certain way, you failed the call (quality wise). you could get all the information in the call, in a way that was appropriate for the customer, but if you didn't word it the way they wanted you to word it, you failed. i had the official training on a thurs/fri - by friday night i had told DH i was leaving and getting a new job. took less than 8 weeks for me to get the job i now have

in my current role, there is a degree of scripting - but you still have a fair degree of freedom. i guess if you weren't meeting other requirements of the role, they may get a bit more picky about the scripting, but as it stands at the moment i don't notice it at all.

we do have very VERY strict guidelines in regards to time management. average handling time, percentage of time dealing direct with customers vs time doing work after the calls - and the biggest one is how long we are on breaks etc. they are timed to the second. a LOT of people find this ridiculous and frustrating, but having done some training in the setting up and running of a call centre, i know how much this can make a difference. at the moment, we are flat out. constantly people waiting for help. so any time we're not dealing with customers is time that isn't well spent. our average handling time for customers is about 8 minutes - if we're 30 seconds late back from each of our breaks (we have 2*15min, lunch, and five minute breaks every hour) each person would deal with, on average, one less customer a day. in our centre alone that's around 250 customers that don't get answered. australia wide, with 25 call centres, that's a huge number of people not helped each day.... so yes, it seems to be serious overkill when you're looking at it, but when you get the why of it, it makes sense

and meh i'm not too phased - i get paid to do a job, i do it. obviously not everyone feels like that - but i think my own background in this sort of field means i'm much less antsy about it all. it is what it is kwim?

Bath I showed DH and he replied to you but I lost his post :(

Yes, I have been through it. I was even promoted to supervisor of 4 staff, and still didn't get to think for them or myself.. Just got to cop the flak if they did something wrong.. It came under the admin/clerks banner, however my 'controllin' boss expected things to be done the same way by all staff (I am talking ticking vs putting a dash when cross referencing sheets, or even certain colour highlighters).. It was a joke. The amount of times I stood up and said that my staff are people, not robots, was unbelievable.

Mine was mainly cause I had a boss who was a control freak. Always wanted to check emails before sending.. And even now I no longer work for that company, I have lots of experience in my industry, and I still have to pull myself up from asking permission to do something that is a normal part of my day.. I know the industry well enough to know what rules to bend, but still didn't dare do it when it would have saved time and customer frustration.

Hmmm, sort of.

I worked in change communications where it was my job to communicate changes to the workforce. After much navel-gazing, I've decided it doesn't suit me because often, I didn't think the changes were good ones but in a large organisation questioning those changes is not welcomed. I've seen too many bad decisions being made because often senior management like to be seen to be 'doing' something regardless of whether the changes are wise or not.

Now I'm planning a career change into public policy where I can set the agenda (more) rather than implement changes others have decided upon, if that makes sense.

I would think that in a lot of jobs permission to think was never granted in the first place. There's not much call for thought in an assembly line.
We own our own business so we lack permission not to think and TBH there are days when being a drone would be a welcome change. I'm pretty sure DH would rather not be dealing with an angry client right now who has been ****ed off by one of our managers thinking something stupid.

Olive:thanks for trying... I've also lost a post tonight... not sure why... i think I've forgotten the ropes a bit! LOL

DMB: Yes, DH also had a crazy woman control freak as his last boss as well. She bullied him something terrible but he was too polite to swear back at her. All he wanted to do was help his customers but he was told: "Don't worry about the F***ing customers, YOU worry about MY reputation because this is MY bank and MY town" And he was meant to do deals even if it wasn't in the customers best interests... can the couplé's 98yo mother guarantee the loan... give ém the money! Um, no, you don't do that! Sometimes it's not right to put people into that position... haven't you learnt anything from the GFC???

I also worry how this affects women in labour in a hospital environment. Medical staff probably have to follow quite a strict protocol and ignore their personal thoughts on things... which is why I was told to "hurry up we need this birthing suite, we're really busy todäy" ie I was labouring too slowly according to their script.

yes. this is happening in universities as well.

For example, if supervising PhD students, staff no longer have the opportunity to properly mentor their students. They (the students) perform in front of a panel. This panel can be comprised of a minimum of 2 people, but I have seen and been subjected to a university requring 5 :o. basically this is to ensure that 'no crazy lefties' get hold of the students :rofl:

Also, there is the policy where every meeting must be undertaken with the door open. Although it is guised as an anti-sexual harrasment measure, it is, in reality about control and social behaviour modelling. From what i have experienced and witnessed it has resulted in an acute drop in debate and discussion of ideas as all meetings are now open to public ears and eyes and every word is heard from all passer bys. not healthy when universities are, by nature, a place for thought generation.

I am a nurse and this is happening more and more, often to the patients detriment and is squandering resources. We now have 'tools' to assess everything they are forms where everything is scored. The score then dictates patient management and is so impersonal it often fails to identify patients at risk and wrongly identifies patients that aren't clinically at risk. This means that a patient who has gone outside had a smoke then walked up the stairs would qualify for an emergency call due to high blood pressure and heart rate especially if there is a junior nurse caring for the patient who may not consider the background and just look at the numbers.

In health it is a dangerous practice that is going to significantly reduce the skill level in the workforce and put people's lives at risk. Having Protocols and guidelines are absolutely necessary but so is allowing educated experienced clinicians to use their own judgement based on their skills and knowledge. When I was learning health was meant to be patient centers and tailored to the individuals needs, these one size fits all tools are a step away from that belief.

Sorry for the rant but as an experienced nurse I have seen these 'tools' fail and have seen that it is also taking away an individuals ability to think and problem solve.

I'm in the process of changing careers (well, when I go back to work after mat leave) because of this problem. Call centres are extremely regulated to begin with, which like BG we learn to deal with and understand the reasoning. But when they add to that having to use particular wordings (other than regulatory scripts) for calls or say certain "buzz phrases" a certain number of times within the call, it becomes too much.

I went from a role that wasn't base call centre but part of a specialised professional team to being treated like a bunch of juveniles incapable of thinking for ourselves. Within the space of 12 months, we've seen a complete team change-over as we all began seeking other roles either within the organisation or external. And management still haven't clicked that they've lost the benefit of years of experience in the industry as we've left.

Yep, BG my DH works for the same CC as you and has been wanting to get out for a while now. I read your post nodding at every detail cause its the same as what he has told me :P

Sent from my HTC Legend using Tapatalk

I worked in frontline banking as an assistant manager for about 3 years and experienced exactly what your hubby did. It's just unbelievable the amount of pressure and stress that is placed on people in those roles. I'm out of frontline now but still in banking doing complaint management. In this role I have a fairly large amount of autonomy in the decisions that I make, but this is because I have an amazing GM who believes in and fights for his staff.

We really do seem to be working on training independent thought out of people from day one, aren't we? Even the GP's aren't allowed to decide for themselves anymore whether or not they're going to collaborate with a midwife - they're being bullied by the main Obs in their regions, who are responding to pressure from AMA. Even if they AGREE that midwives are the people qualified to help women birth in their homes, they seem to have no real discretion as to whether they'll collaborate or not for fear of professional backlash.
Then, kids are supposed to just obey and comply or they'll be labelled with something - even in my psych text book, before they even get to the diagnoses for ADHD they talk about kids who are non-compliant, in a general sense...what? The point of having kids and measuring the success of such is to gauge if they're 'compliant'? So that they learn to comply with anyone who has any semblance of power over them? Hmm, that sounds safe and adaptive...not! Our world is taking this for granted, that kids must comply, and teenagers have to comply and then, you comply from there on in or you get passed over for jobs for thinking too much and challenging the status quo.
I think I'm starting to look into the social welfare sector, for when I finally look for work after graduating, and I really hope to have some independence of thought there. If not, I may have to succumb to lifelong nagging and take to writing, remaining poor!