Principles of Enablement and Actualisation
Prof EK Blankenship
To pursue a goal is not the same thing as achieving it. That this is a self-evident truth should not be taken for granted. The proper enabling of a situation requires both steady observance of factors, and strict and rigid maintenance of control, guided by firm principles, and demanding total actualisation of said principles. The goal must be actualised, or it is not. This is the simple fact of the matter, and there is therefore no reason to suppose that the situation can be achieved otherwise.
In this manual we will set out the main points and principles, the manner and structure with which to achieve total actualisation, and suggest some courses of action for given situations.
1. Taking Stock
One of the prime duties of an Enabler is to "come to terms" with any given situation. What can be done with the Actualisers on hand? (NB. It is never a good idea to panic, obviously. Don’t go into a situation assuming you don’t have enough Actualisers – empower those that you do have!). Before you can determine what methods are needed, you need to know what is the sum total of your power base: how do you "exploit" it, so that the power is channelled into a sustainable growth pattern?
While the means of production particularly, and "constant capital" generally, are indeed important to successful enablement, they are not necessarily as important as previously believed. There are no obstacles to enablement other than poorly constructed conceptual structures. It could be said that the modern concern could not function without, say computers, or telephones – and yet, with proper empowerment of Actualisers, this is not necessarily true. So long as Actualisers are autonomous individuals, carrying out their tasks in order to achieve their goals, there is no reason why they cannot be expected to complete any task given them. Few would accept a repairman’s request for tools and materials; you would expect him to bring his own, and if he didn’t, you wouldn’t call him again. The same should be true of Actualisers. While it may make it simpler to have tools and materials on hand for your Actualisers to use, it should not be seen as somehow essential. On the contrary, through the proper use of techniques such as fear management, Actualisers can be brought to the point where they:-
2. Redirect the Flow
While some would say that a desirable atmosphere is one of mutual satisfaction between Enablers and Actualisers, where each treats the other with respect, etc., this opinion would suggest a lack of understanding of purpose. After all, any organisation wishing to produce a surplus – to achieve its goal – must not set aside concerns for the mental health of staff: it must obliterate any such conception. Any Enabler worth his/her salt knows that "stress" can actually aid the achievement of goals. An Actualiser (who as we said before, is an autonomous individual) may need the constant threat of the "stick" to truly perform. Studies have recently shown that stress may be good for you, but this potential positive benefit should not weigh heavily on the Enabler’s mind. As the point is achieving the goal, nothing else should enter into the considerations.
The proper use of techniques such as fear management, desire restructuralisation and perception management can create the desired atmosphere.
Taking all this into account, it may be found that, for the purposes of actualising a goal, the fish-head which stinks the worst, stinks best.
Several techniques have been referred to above. In this section we will
attempt to define and illustrate their utilisation.
a. Fear management
In the contemporary atmosphere of redundancies, temporary/contract "employment", etc., Actualisers cannot help but feel a great sense of insecurity. Optimism for the future has dwindled away; those political parties and organisations that preach of a "brighter future" are met with cynicism and apathy.
Far from being a woeful state of affairs, this is a potentially profitable situation for Enablers. The pervading insecurity is particularly useful. Enablers should make every effort to leave Actualisers in an almost permanent state of anxiety, which is most conducive to creative thinking, as well as fostering a fervent commitment.
Let us consider a case study:
Company A is involved in the management of resources. In order to achieve maximum profitability, it is determined that Actualisers must all become involved in the verification process, whereby delinquent accounts are dealt with. It is determined that each Actualiser will compete with one another. Results are posted on a board in the centre of the office, and those not meeting the standards are "fined" (a portion of their wages are withheld as an incentive). Then, to "make things more interesting", a fictional Actualiser should lead the scores. Rumours should be carefully created and managed – is this super-performing Actualiser real or not? are people really being made redundant? have poorly performing Actualisers been forced to take part in humiliating rituals? In this fashion, an atmosphere of heightened anxiety can be created and maintained.
b. Desire restructuralisation
Desire restructuralisation is the process whereby an Actualiser’s commitment to the goal is improved. As is so often the case, Actualisers lack the proper "mindset" for total commitment. Desire restructuralisation is the means by which that commitment is maintained, and in some cases, created.
Let us consider another case study:
Sharon A--------- is an Actualiser at a large consultancy. Being a young newlywed, she has her "head in the clouds", and is less committed to the corporate whole than is needed. While she is undoubtedly an effective Actualiser, and is in fact in the top 5% for overall productivity and accuracy, there is the concern that complacency will eventually set in. After all, one of the key tasks of any Enabler is to anticipate contingencies.
With this in mind, Sharon’s Enabler decides on a course of action which will restructure her mindset. He begins by acting sympathetic, and asking numerous, vague questions about her marriage. Always, he wears the same expression of concern and sorrow. Then, he arranges for an attractive and inquisitive young female to pursue Sharon’s husband, who is quickly and easily hooked on addictive chemicals. A private investigator follows the young woman, so as to report anything untoward. Eventually, after the build up of an impressive dossier, Sharon is sent the collected photographs of her husband, who has begun to worry her of late. Sadly, their marriage cannot survive this tawdry episode, and Sharon’s Enabler suggests she see a counsellor to get over her love-rat of a husband. Telling her he suffered a similar blow many years past, he encourages her to see his therapist, Dr Miami. Dr Miami finds that Sharon is deeply disturbed, and recommends a treatment of several different chemical substances. The combination leads to paranoia, sleeplessness and mood swings. As Sharon’s work begins to suffer, her Enabler changes tack. Threatening her with dismissal, he demands a more committed approach. Having been her only source of strength during this ugly affair, she quickly accepts his demands, and with the help of a different cocktail of drugs from Dr Miami, Sharon becomes the ideal Actualiser: punctual, compliant and totally unable to deal with reality.
c. Perception management
While familiar to any student of contemporary politics, perception management is in fact one of the most common forms of control today. Its most commonly recognised form is the remark, "Well, I’m sorry that’s your perception." When put in a "reasonable" way, it implies that the person being spoken to has a poor grasp on reality; this should be reinforced at any opportunity. Used in conjunction with other techniques, perception management can be a most effective means of putting one’s opponent off-balance. It is most effective when used in a calm and arrogant manner.
4. Quality Assurance
The rigid enforcement of a system of Quality Assurance (QA) in all aspects of Actualisation is the best means of promoting good practice and total efficiency. QA procedures should create an atmosphere of constant second-guessing on the part of Actualisers, as well as demanding a thorough approach.
It should be noted however, that QA procedures, while emphasising definite demands on the part of Actualisers, should in fact be as vague as possible. The appearance of absolute standards should merely mask the reality of ever-changing - flexible - demands.
The most obvious QA standards would be those regarding correspondence, e.g., the font and point size to use, what paper to print on, etc. Yet QA can be extended to Actualisers behaviour. As one of the purposes of the flexible labour approach is the break down the barrier between "work" and "leisure", these QA standards can even be applied to an Actualiser's "personal" life* .
Regular notices of QA violations should be brought to an Actualiser's attention, and repeat violators should be publicly "named and shamed." A highly visible noticeboard, recording the type and number of violations, could be used as an incentive to do better. That there may be an element of capriciousness on the part of Enablers in determining what is or isn't a QA violation at any one time, does not reduce the seriousness of the matter.
We have set out in this manual the proper manner and methods of Enablement and Actualisation. Using a creative and flexible approach, guided by the correct principles, and with the goal always in the forefront (and the "back") of the mind, Actualisation can be achieved.
Using techniques such as those aforementioned, coupled with the total efficiency gained from strict adherence to QA procedures, today's Enabler can extract the needed actualisation and produce a surplus. The flexible, empowering approach reduces matters to their constituent parts, anticipates and obliterates contingencies, and yields the desired result.
A Note on "Conformity"
A Note on "Conformity"
While proper actualisation requires total commitment, it has long been a commonplace truism among Enablers that this means total conformity. A more unactualisable conceptual structure could hardly be imagined.
Conformity promises acceptance. Those societies which emphasise conformity, e.g. the former Soviet Union or the United States of America, create an atmosphere in which "dissident" or "subversive" individuals are isolated, vilified and often times, disciplined. While in many instances necessary, and certainly understandable from the point of view of maintaining control, the end result is most unfortunate. The resulting acceptance, or belonging, by being part of the team, and not being against "Us", creates a mindset which has expectations. Aside from turning the dissident/subversive individual into a martyr to malcontents and competitors, it creates demands for a certain degree of reciprocity. That this is intolerable should be obvious. Human history can be seen as one long error in terms of reciprocity. While generally used to placate Actualisers, Enablers have often found that at times, Actualisers will exact punishment if they feel they are not getting their "due". After all, "fair's fair."
This is a mindset which must be obliterated. Instead of conformity and its consequent reciprocity, should be flexibility. The flexible Actualiser has no expectations. Chaos is their only constant, and each nanosecond brings a new and potentially empowering challenge. Enablers should emphasise the "individuality" of each Actualiser, each potentiality, each challenge. Nothing should be taken for granted, and no promises offered.
The goal should always be emphasised, and the demand for total commitment the requirement for proper actualisation. Those that fall short must fall by the wayside.