Slashdot Mirror


Better Factories Through Role Playing

pacopico writes "A former Ford executive has taken his unique brand of factory training to the public. According to Businessweek, Hossein Nivi has set up a new company called Pendaran that forces people to endure a week-long, manic training simulation that's meant to produce safer, better workers. The participants — lots of people from the tech and military fields — get yelled at by actors while they try to assemble things like golf carts and airplanes in a simulation that mixes virtual tasks on computers with real world tasks. After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team. It sounds both awesome and bizarre."

160 comments

  1. these people should be embarassed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    they are lunatics and assholes

  2. That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Getting yelled at until your spirit is broken? You think that sounds awesome?

    This isn't new or unique, we've been whipping slaves as long as we've had them. Dehumanize people, then work them like animals. Woo hoo sign me up.

    1. Re:That does not sound awesome by black3d · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ya, same thought crossed my mind. Chain gangs work like a well-oiled machine too, once you've broken their spirits. I'm not sure why breaking people's spirit is considered "awesome". Submitter must be in management? Probably sounds awesome to them, since "workers" aren't really people after all..

      --
      "The true measure of a person is how they act when they know they won't get caught." - DSRilk
    2. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting yelled at until your spirit is broken? You think that sounds awesome?

      This isn't new or unique, we've been whipping slaves as long as we've had them. Dehumanize people, then work them like animals. Woo hoo sign me up.

      Employee law suites in 3...2...1.....>AWESOME

    3. Re:That does not sound awesome by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not sure why breaking people's spirit is considered "awesome".

      If you RTFA, you'd see that they break people of their independent streak.
      By forcing them into shitty conditions and allowing them to fail over and over, flaws are exposed and eventually self-recognized
      The psychological pressure is there just to speed up the process.

      There's nothing special about this course, other than it's being done to white/blue collar workers instead of raw military recruits at boot camp.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:That does not sound awesome by CODiNE · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's what the summary makes it sound like, but that's not actually what they're doing.

      The workers have access to help, safety information, proper procedures, etc...

      Instead of using their resources to work correctly and efficiently they do what people tend to do which is ignore all the rules and safety training as much as possible until disaster strikes.

      The course simulates disaster striking when procedures aren't followed. By forcing an instantaneous cause/effect environment they're making the workers see the effects of their actions. They fight and they fight until after a few days they stop running around cleaning up their messes and start to check the rules and do things the right way in the first place.

      Yeah it's a bit pavlovian, but it's not crushing anyone's spirit, it's teaching them personal responsibility.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    5. Re:That does not sound awesome by asmkm22 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Depends. An awful lot of people really do need to have some fears, insecurities, and other walls broken down in order to really reach their potential. Without that, whenever something bad happens to them, like actually getting yelled at, or missing a deadline, or whatever, they just revert back to the good old human standard of denial and blaming others. Because that's what we do when confronted with something we aren't used to or comfortable with.

      It's kind of like how anyone who wants to get into boxing will have to learn to take a punch, at some point. Doesn't matter how good you are, if you fall apart with a single punch to the face, you'll never go anywhere. Sounds like they're roleplaying social versions of punches to the face.

    6. Re:That does not sound awesome by black3d · · Score: 5, Funny

      >If you RTFA

      Heresy!

      --
      "The true measure of a person is how they act when they know they won't get caught." - DSRilk
    7. Re:That does not sound awesome by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Sounds like an MMO raid to me.

    8. Re:That does not sound awesome by causality · · Score: 1

      Yeah it's a bit pavlovian, but it's not crushing anyone's spirit, it's teaching them personal responsibility.

      So it's an instant quick-fix band-aid remedy for poor parenting?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    9. Re:That does not sound awesome by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course if you read reality into the lie, those people with and independent resistive streak, fail the course and are excluded from employment. Basically testing to ensure those people employed are meek, obedient and will accept abuse. That is all one week provides, the opportunity to exclude those not born to be slaves.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:That does not sound awesome by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Some people are unbreakable..and that's because they've spent most of their lives in situations like this course, being mistreated and manipulated. There is such a thing as going too far to save a buck as it can cause more damage than it fixes. While some people might benefit from this course, others could be made more resistant to hierarchy.. It's usually the latter who are actually smart enough to not need the training and who are the better employees. This 'course' is a one-size-fits-all attempt at weeding out those who do not fit management's 68-pieces-of-flair, square peg for square hole picture of their 'ideal' employee. This results in companies who have mediocre culture, products, and profit...like ford.

    11. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      So it's an instant quick-fix band-aid remedy for poor parenting?

      Ah, no. They're still going to overeat till obesity, create a couple kids with multiple spouses, run up loads of debt with 3rd and 4th mortgages, vote for whomever promises the most bennies, watch way too much sports and "reality" TV and generally make the world around them decline as rapidly as possible.

      They just won't make as many oil spills at work.

    12. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite. It can work when voluntary (implying the person is psychologically ready) for *some* phobias that can be gradually reproduced in situations where the person won't experience additional stress/pain as a result. OTOH if the person is forced to experience it before they're ready, or if the exposure is done in an environment where they feel additionally stressed/upset/hurt, then the best you'll see is short-term "progress" made just to escape the simulation -- possibly with a few additional phobias thanks to the experience.

      Also, in the case of things like being verbally yelled at, the person is extremely unlikely to respond well to just being exposed to it over-and-over, particularly if the person's reacting due to past mistreatment or abuse. The best therapy in those cases is to help the person gain the "tools" they need to deal with the situation assertively, including being able to tell the other individual to tone it down.

      This is all extremely different from a *non-phobic* person that is a bit afraid of a potentially unpleasant aspect of an activity they really want to do, like learning to fall off of a horse safely or putting their face in the water for swimming. Those people don't have a phobia in the first place, they're just nervous that it might be harmful/unpleasant.

    13. Re:That does not sound awesome by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I read about how this is how adoptive parents used to (or maybe still do?) get their adopted children to depend upon and bond with their new parents. After adoption, they put the children through intense emotional drama and sort of force a "rebirth". Fortunately, it is now considered to be child abuse. Same theory applies, I think, though.

      Companies show no loyalty to employees anymore, yet employees often feel this strange sense of obligated loyalty to their employers (I'm not averse to this, myself, either). So this makes this whole thing even sicker.

      I suppose it's not too different from the military, where they break you down during the first couple of months and then rebuild you into an unquestioning, obeying, fighting machine.

      The only difference being, of course, that you sign away a lot of your freedom when you join the military and you're going to be fighting against life and death. You're not looking to stick tab A in slot B for eight hours a day in a guy's business to feed your family

    14. Re:That does not sound awesome by Seumas · · Score: 1

      If you can't see the problem with what you just described . . . .

    15. Re:That does not sound awesome by Seumas · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, this is already done and has been for decades. It is called requiring a college degree. That's why it often doesn't matter what your degree is in or if it is related to the job -- just having the degree proves that you can sit down and shut up and do what you're told and buy into the institution for four or five years straight.

    16. Re:That does not sound awesome by Seumas · · Score: 2

      This sort of effort is likely to turn an otherwise hard worker with a great work ethic who just happens to think for themselves instead of being an obedient sheep into someone who plays along on the outside, but harbors a seething hatred on the inside and therefore constantly sabotaged and undermines your system at every turn they can.

    17. Re:That does not sound awesome by davydagger · · Score: 1

      They do this in the Army and it works great.

      Until you realize what a buerocratic juggernaut the army is, and how its fraught with waste, ineffeciencies, miscommunication, very rarely works with great co-ordination as a whole. To the point is a joke.

      Thinking for oneself never gets further than thinking on how to cheat the buerocracy or advance further. Technical correctness is admired, while failure to achieve broader goals is often met with amusement, because you can hide behind the buerocratic tape of "its above my pay-grade", when you are fully capable of understanding the situation, and "I was not trained/its not my job", when you are clearly capable.

      It generates mounds of paper, where you can "prove" your effeciency as a CYA. Soliders develop effecient rules and the ability to Cover Your Ass, by staying in strictly defined boundries.

    18. Re:That does not sound awesome by Nephandus · · Score: 1

      Most people can't and never could.

      --
      "A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."
    19. Re:That does not sound awesome by davydagger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      and the army, and the nation as a whole show some degree of loyalty back. The military is hardly a commericial outfit looking for exploit you for your labor.

      You can't get fired from the army, unless your convicted of a crime, generally pretty severe one too.

      Everyone gets no-cost healthcare. To include prescriptions.

      Probably the most proggressive pay-rating system in the entire country. Generals make a tiny fraction of what corporate officers make with similar amount of employees and/or responsibility, by a far margin. Enlisted make far more than their unskilled labor equivilants. When you talk about skilled labor, and total compensation, its about even with skilled labor.

      Not only is management pay more proportial, its also decided in a much more fair method, and its also far more transparent. Its all listed online in an easy to read convienant format, here from the official DFAS(defense finance and accounting services):
      http://www.dfas.mil/militarymembers/payentitlements/militarypaytables.html

      Essentially your base pay is decided by what your rank is on one axis, and how long been in the military on the other axis. Everyone gets the same base pay, regardless of race, gender, back room deals, how well they know top brass, etc...

      Also, you get special pays for doing things like being various kinds of doctor, sea pay, being on jump status, hazardous duty pay, combat pay, and other special bonuses for doing special, but important roles. These pays are generally flat rate, and listed on the same pay chart. All completely transparant.

      No-cost housing, formerly no-cost, but now dirt cheap meals provided, and subsidized shopping at the PX.

      There are many hazerous jobs, that you could die, loose a limb, or otherwise get critically injured. There is no job that the general public will do more to help you for on the job injuries. The people who experiment with robotic limbs, give soliders who lost them the first pick, over cops, construction, deep sea fishers, demolition workers, and even other potentially more dangerous work. The army wil also pay in full any injuries you get while serving them.

      After the army breaks you down, and makes you into a fighting machine, they are not going to just kick you to the curb after got all they could from you. Corporate America will.

      But I agree, apples to oranges, you can't compare federal service to private employement.

    20. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap. You just described me. I'm filled with a little pride, but mostly shame.

    21. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry your degree wasn't valuable but I personally learned a ton in college. I gained a lot of mental toughness having to endure such a heavy workload and a part time job and try to juggle my personal life. I wouldn't want to go through it again, but I wouldn't be where I am today without it. Anybody who knows me will tell you I'm not a "sit down and shut up" kind of guy.

    22. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds like you went to a very different college than I did, or you have sour grapes.

    23. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm sorry your degree wasn't valuable

      That's not what was posted. Sorry your degree wasn't valuable enough to retain your basic english skills.

    24. Re:That does not sound awesome by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      This sounds about right.

      There are times when this instinct to work together and sacrifice personal agenda and initiative is useful. Times of crisis, ins war zone or natural disaster for instance. Any other time and its counterproductive. You lose all the best qualities of people and merely suppress the worst.

      Well defined boundaries are good for children until they are ready to explore beyond them. Mature adults have already been through this.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    25. Re:That does not sound awesome by skids · · Score: 2

      This. The summary was sensationalized, probably to stoke just such a "discussion" as above. Which is too bad because the TFA provides plenty of fodder without embellisment.

      While coping with stressful situations is a valuable skill to be teaching the workforce, I found it a bit ironic that one of the things the trainees were criticised for was not working to find the root causes of problems by cleaning up oil slicks instead of finding out how to prevent them, while apparently the management that sent these trainees into this program are content to teach their workers to deal with chaos instead of engineering it off the manufactoring floor.

      Also as with any such program that may appeal with to the prejudices of management, this procedure should probably be evaluated against similar techniques in an objective and impartial fashion.

    26. Re:That does not sound awesome by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

      Exactly. "awesome and bizarre" sounds about as detached from the reality of having to actually experience it as possible.

    27. Re:That does not sound awesome by dargaud · · Score: 1

      In addition to that, it's one thing to be yelled at by your lathe instructor "don't put your finger there!" and then look at his own missing fingertip, and then another entirely to be yelled at by... actors ?!? WTF.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    28. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, he described the General Motors Fremont plant. Wonder who owns that now.

    29. Re:That does not sound awesome by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

      That sounds great, unfortunately, as reported here recently, the payroll system is borked...

    30. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Service Guarantees Citizenship.

    31. Re:That does not sound awesome by geminidomino · · Score: 2

      No, what you posted was typical, bog-standard anti-intellectual dribble. The failing of GPs degree wasn't in his reading skills, but in how not to overestimate the clueless.

    32. Re:That does not sound awesome by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      There's nothing special about this course, other than it's being done to white/blue collar workers instead of raw military recruits at boot camp.

      No kidding. I was wondering about the comments until now. :)

    33. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen this happen far more often in high stress team based situations (cooking at a restaurant during peak hours is a great example). The more pressure that is applied, and the more aggressively it is applied, will not break people so much as poison them against the job. Especially when it's something as insubstantial as cooking some horrendously obese person's steak three times over because "it's not rare enough". After a point you just walk out because it's not worth it.

    34. Re:That does not sound awesome by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      After the army breaks you down, and makes you into a fighting machine, they are not going to just kick you to the curb after got all they could from you.

      if you actually believe this, there's a little documentary I'd like you to watch. it's called Rambo: First Blood

    35. Re:That does not sound awesome by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that found it funny the guy worked at Ford and they mention yelling and role playing. Isn't that the intro to the movie Gung Ho?

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    36. Re:That does not sound awesome by agrisea · · Score: 1

      Are we Bees all of a sudden? I would hope that companies do not make any more drones who only follow a strict set of policies. Who would then think outside of the box to fix a problem or think up a new product or service?

      --
      Agrisea Tsunami - Epyc Servers... https://agrisea.net/products
    37. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      buerocracy n. A system of rule or government by Algerian or Moroccan immigrants.

    38. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey, that's something CEOs and presidents and VPs and directors could all use. get them out of their attitude that anything they can visualize is possible (as long as somebody else is doing the actual work) and that those folks doing the actual work have really nothing to tell them about the business.

    39. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry your degree wasn't valuable enough to retain your basic english skills.

      One, a degree can't retain things. Two, countries and words derived from them are capitalized. Three, what isn't said is often as informative as what was.

    40. Re:That does not sound awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I know an engineer who was put to work next to an assembly line for a few weeks to "learn how it works". He didn't understand what the point was, but reading this article made me realize that they likely wanted to break his spirit until he is obedient enough. I don't know how well it worked for the others, but he quit the company.

    41. Re:That does not sound awesome by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      >If you RTFA

      Heresy!

      Even worse, he's standing out in the otherwise well-oiled chain gang of people who don't RTFA.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    42. Re:That does not sound awesome by davydagger · · Score: 1

      well, yeah, I'll see your fictional movie based off a previous war, and raise you 9 years of real life army service.

      Not to say the Army, nor the VA is perfect, or even great, but the level of care is far greater than you'd recieve elsewhere

  3. Or we could, you know... by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    just pay them better and give them better health benefits. But using military grade training and manipulation techniques works too I guess...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The beatings will continue until morale improves.

    2. Re:Or we could, you know... by brainboyz · · Score: 2

      Given how shitty American-built cars tend to be despite great pay and benefits, I think the training and manipulation might work better.

    3. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We tried that. Then the State Department and successive administrations signed one trade agreement after another and the jobs evacuated to Asia making domestic workers expensive and fungible.

    4. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats due to the last in first out method used in auto companies.

    5. Re:Or we could, you know... by triffid_98 · · Score: 1

      Really? Which ones? Once upon a time that may well have been true, but you can buy a pretty decent car from anyone nowadays, even the British.(*)

      Also, said great pay and benefits are no longer available in many cases. People who were grandfathered in may still have them but the people joining up now certainly don't.

      (*) FYI, Gung Ho wasn't intended as a documentary.

    6. Re:Or we could, you know... by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      There isn't such a thing a 100% American built car.

      Most cars perceived as being built in America are mostly made in Mexico.

    7. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pay them better and give them better health benefits

      My hysterical laughter and weeping might be bringing the cops to check on me soon, if my neighbors are home to have heard it, but before they get here, I just have to let you know how fucking stupidly unrealistic that statement sounds in the year 2013 in the USA.

    8. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mexico is an American country (just like the US).

    9. Re:Or we could, you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe wholeheartedly in paying people properly and in health care - but I also have to say that from my experience, that most definitely DOES NOT equal better or smarter or more motivated employees. Hell it doesn't even give you a shot at sober ones.

    10. Re:Or we could, you know... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the INS, you goddam wetback.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. like this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to be a worker like you, then I took an arrow in the knee.

  5. I'm a level 14 welder! by kwiqsilver · · Score: 2

    Oh...is that not what they meant by role playing? I guess the dice could pose a safety hazard on the factory floor.

    1. Re:I'm a level 14 welder! by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Funny

      I put on my robe and wizard hat.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:I'm a level 14 welder! by AbsGeekNZ · · Score: 3, Funny

      Level 14 welder......but you still take orders from a level 2 manager with an intelligence score of 9....

    3. Re:I'm a level 14 welder! by Bigbutt · · Score: 2

      Managers use Charisma. Intelligence is a dump stat.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    4. Re:I'm a level 14 welder! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Informative?

      http://bash.org/?104383

    5. Re:I'm a level 14 welder! by virgnarus · · Score: 1

      That's because he's the DM.

  6. How much does it cost? by hedgemage · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sure, it may work, despite the dubious methodology, but who is actually going to pay to have their workers go through this? Since the bubble days of the 90's, training is an area that has been eliminated from virtually all budgets in favor of hiring only 'experienced' workers. No organization wants to pay for training anymore even when there is a shortage of experienced labor. I worked for a chip manufacturer that in the early-mid 90's put new production staff through a MONTH of 8-hour-a-day classroom training before they even got into the fabrication facility. After a couple years, it was down to 3 weeks, then 2, then 1, then layoffs. The modern management culture says that there is a limitless pool of cheap, experienced labor, so why train?

    1. Re:How much does it cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA:

      Lasley’s company, Edw. C. Levy Co., helps steel companies turn slag material into cement, road paving, and other products. It has sent a few dozen people through the Pendaran program and noted a 60 percent to 70 percent safety improvement among those teams, which translated into a $1 million annual savings from higher productivity. Now the company looks to put the majority of its 1,800 people through the course. “The first three days may be the worst thing you can imagine, but then the clouds part and real change happens,” Lasley says.

  7. The Marine Corps Called... by bughunter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team. It sounds both awesome and bizarre.

    This has otherwise been known as "Boot Camp" or "Basic Training" for generations of soldiers.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      Attempts to apply military methods to civilian business tend to fail dramatically, because:

      1. Business is not war.

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Ignacio · · Score: 4, Interesting

      1. Business is not war.

      It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?

      3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.

      So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?

    3. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Business is not war.

      It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?

      Yes, it would be such a bad thing. If you make living together in society a zero-sum conflict game, you get hell, not society.

      3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.

      So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?

      The macho MBAs would love to go through that training themselves. They would get a chance to be the big tough bullies they are, on a playing field designed in their favor. Just like they are always on.

      This type of technique fundamentally does not work. There are proven ways to build a team. This method is designed to make people passively obedient from fear - as others have suggested, to make a slave workforce. Using these techniques in a real military from necessity is a completely different matter, despite the scarcity of anything resembling a 'just war'.

    4. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by tragedy · · Score: 2

      So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?

      The top military are officers, not enlisted men. While enlisted soldiers can later go through officer's training, or even be promoted in extraordinary circumstances in wartime, generally military organizations aren't actually absolute meritocracies that promote people in stages all the way from the bottom to the top. Not that officers don't go through their own tough training, but some of the expectations are fundamentally different.

    5. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. War is hell
      2. Everyone has to work

      If corporations are allowed to pretend business is war, then logically, we will all be in hell every day until we retire or die.

      Chicago let business and war mix for a while in the twenties. Ask them how that worked out.

    6. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Ignacio · · Score: 1

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?

      Yes, it would be such a bad thing. If you make living together in society a zero-sum conflict game, you get hell, not society.

      You say that as though modern life isn't already a zero-sum game, both on the individual and on the societal level.

    7. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      You say that as though modern life isn't already a zero-sum game, both on the individual and on the societal level.

      Nonsense. Since the end of the Cold War, the number of wars world-wide has fallen to an historic low, and economic growth has grown to historic highs. Since 2000, trade has flourished and the world economy has grown more than 4% annually. That is better then ever before in history. War has winners and losers. But with peace, we can all prosper, and it is not "zero-sum".

    8. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.

      No they're not. Not even close. The defining aspect of war is two (or more) large armed groups trying to kill each other. Not in the metaphorical "we're going to kill the competition" way, but in the actual piles-of-corpses, starving-refugees, survivors-crippled-for-life way. If you think that's what business looks like, it's because you have no idea what war looks like, and I envy you your ignorance.

      The other basics of military life, like honor, discipline, and mutual respect? Only if you're very, very lucky. Since getting out of the service, I've worked for a couple of businesses that had these, and far more that didn't. Most other veterans will tell you the same. To be sure, there are compensations--even if I were physically up to it, I'd rather live my civilian life than be back in uniform, all in all--but in those aspects, the military world has the business world beat all to hell.

      Other posters have already addressed your other points. I urge you to read what they wrote carefully.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      If you make living together in society a zero-sum conflict game, you get hell, not society.

      Wars tend to be negative-sum games.

    10. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Ignacio · · Score: 1

      "Prosperity" is not created out of thin air. Something must be given up in order to attain it. That you are not the only one that had to give something up for it is irrelevant.

    11. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sun Tzu's Art of War is considered classic business literature in Chinese culture. What does that tell you?

    12. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My father-in-law went in as an Electronics Tech and retired as a Lt Col. Of course, this is in Canada.

    13. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?

      Because the Marines are under the direct command of the government, and the corporate heads are those steering the wheels of government. What could possibly go wrong?

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    14. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by mjwx · · Score: 2

      It's (generally) bloodless and unarmed, but the basics are all there.

      Not really, it's more like politics (lots of talking, some shouting but nothing ever gets done). MBA's like to pretend that business is war because it makes them feel like important generals, not just the douchebag with a nice suite they really are.

      Business is not war precisely because it lacks the destruction and death that acompanies war. Even cold wars claim 1000's of lives.

      Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?

      Do you really need to ask that question?

      In the mid 20th century we had corporations who practically had armies, we called it Fascism. In the modern day, we call them Mafia's.

      So then have them go through the training as well

      Yeah right. Good luck with that. They'll never do it.

      This kind of "training" is only for the workers. Managers are exempt.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    15. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      So then have them go through the training as well. The top military had to go through it to get where they are, so why not the top corporate?

      The top military are officers, not enlisted men. While enlisted soldiers can later go through officer's training, or even be promoted in extraordinary circumstances in wartime, generally military organizations aren't actually absolute meritocracies that promote people in stages all the way from the bottom to the top. Not that officers don't go through their own tough training, but some of the expectations are fundamentally different.

      This,

      With all three branches of (Australia's) military you can enlist as a regular soldier (seaman or airman) or as an officer. Regulars can be promoted or can opt to officer training (you'll need your CO's approval though). I.E. A regular enters the navy as a seaman an officer enters the academy as a Midshipman and is promoted to Acting Sub Lieutenant when they graduate. For a Seaman to get to Acting Sub Lieutenant without going through the academy (Read: on merit) they need to go through the NCO and warrant officer ranks but usually they still need to go to the academy.

      Which is nothing like business where you get promoted for brown-nosing more than merit.

      BTW, our military ranking system comes from the olden times (I.E. before the US even existed as a nation) when officers were aristocracy and soldiers were commoners and the two never intermingled. Even in the Napoleonic wars raising an officer from the ranks was considered very controversial. However over the decades/centuries the system has evolved into a "mostly meritocracy" (although in many 3rd world nations, the armies are still very nepotistic).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    16. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      The OP is correct, the top military generally went through pretty much the same training as the enlisted ranks. When they were junior officers it's wasn't just the same training - it was the same training right beside the enlisted ranks. And it's the type of training described in the article.

      Most civilians don't realize that when a miltary member says 'training' he means a lot more than just sitting in a lecture. It also includes simulators, drills, paper exercises, field exercises, a wide variety of hand on training... And for the officers, that means learning and going through many of the same operations (though not in as great a detail in the technical fields) and learning how to lead and manage the the men and women thus trained.

      ADM Greenert, the current CNO, once upon a time he was a butterbar on a fire team, or in the get-wet, or sweating out a crash restart of the reactor in AMR2 or Maneuvering right beside the rag hats. Ditto with the Army equivalents for the current Chief of Staff of the United States Army. The current Commandant was an aviator, so like the Chair Force, his experience didn't exactly parallel the enlisted ranks. (The last Commandant however started out leading a rifle platoon.)

    17. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      "Prosperity" is not created out of thin air. Something must be given up in order to attain it.

      So then what you are saying, is that since our global economy grew by 4% annual, then the economy of another planet must have declined by the same amount. Do you have any evidence that this is true?

    18. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently the best to make a human into a inhumane mass-murderer.

      Or as you Americans call them: "heroes".

      Vote me down, but you are FUCKED-UP.

    19. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, if there is none else seen getting worse off, most people wont feel like they are prospering. Life is zero-sum game only because players want it to be such. Put another way, if there is no scaling the social ladder, you are not going anywhere and you get no respect (or love). Whatever the game, there'll always be more than one player who wants to "own" it.

    20. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by ethanms · · Score: 1

      Attempts to apply military methods to civilian business tend to fail dramatically, because:

      1. Business is not war.

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      3. Corporate imitations of military training are almost invariably done by and for spoiled brat MBA types who love to think of themselves as macho warriors, but wouldn't last five minutes humping a pack and a rifle.

      #1 is all you need for this argument.

      In the US, and most of the western world, there is no reason to allow yourself to be brutalized mentally and physically for a job unless that job is saving lives (either your own or others).

      But having it do to you while working to make Ford vehicles slightly faster so that the company can turn a (larger) profit? No thanks.

      I could see something like this working if they tied incentives to both your individual performance and the performance of your "unit", people might be willing to deal with this if it means a 20-30% larger pay check week to week...

    21. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by ethanms · · Score: 1

      2. Corporations are not armies.

      Would it really be such a bad thing to view them as such?

      Uhh, yeah, kind of...

      I'm not going to the stockade because I decided to quit my job in the middle of a project.

      I'm also not going to risk my life for the success of a project.

    22. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by ethanms · · Score: 1

      I suppose if you consider the time before humans and the time after humans, then OK sure it's zero sum I suppose because we're all going to be heatless dust one day.

      But in the meantime, looking at the era of human existence, I don't think life has ever been a zero sum game. We create and capture things from what was previous useless... that alone makes it not zero sum.

    23. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      "Prosperity" is not created out of thin air.

      Well clearly it requires materials and effort.

      But when the first caveman skinned a bear and sat on it he didn't make anyone else's arse any colder.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    24. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by Sparton · · Score: 1

      Well clearly it requires materials and effort.

      But when the first caveman skinned a bear and sat on it he didn't make anyone else's arse any colder.

      Except for... you know, the bear.

      For some people, that doesn't matter. For others, there's concerns about the long-term that may not be obvious; for example, the survivability of the bison... I mean bear.

    25. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by tragedy · · Score: 1

      I never said that officers don't go through their own similar training and I recognized that there is a path for enlisted men to some day become one of the chiefs of staff. In the corporate world, you can similarly, in theory, start in the mail room and become CEO, but that sort of thing is the exception, not the rule. This isn't the old days any more where an officer's commission required a relative with a title, or at least a hefty sum of money, but there's still one door for enlisted men and another for officers who will immediately outrank those enlisted men. They have similar training, but, as I said, the expectations are fundamentally different. The same thing is going to be true if you put top executives through this kind of training. Even if it's ostensibly the same training, there are going to be some fundamental differences.

    26. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      In other words, you either didn't read a word I wrote, or lack the intelligence to understand what I write, or are just utterly fucking clueless.

      Because your reply does nothing but repeat your original ignorance.

    27. Re:The Marine Corps Called... by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Yes, I did repeat myself because you seemed to not have grasped what I was saying the first time, Your hostility isn't particularly useful or needed. My point still stands: top military brass typically haven't gone through the same training as typical enlisted men. I didn't say that they didn't get training, or that their training was easier or that they have never been through the same training. There's nothing in your post that materially disagrees with that statement.

      I should also point out that my comments apply to military organizations in general, not just the US military or even just one branch of it.

      Also, regarding your comment:

      Most civilians don't realize that when a miltary member says 'training' he means a lot more than just sitting in a lecture.

      Seriously? Do you really believe that? I can't even begin to understand how detached from reality someone would need to be to actually believe that.

  8. Be a machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretending to be a cog in the machine instead of a human being helps reduce humanity related inefficiencies.

    I'll just wait for the robots: they are way better than pretending to be robots.

  9. Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Pendaran method, designed to force participants to rise above chaos and develop problem-solving techniques, is diametrically opposed, a sort of indictment of Six Sigma and other beloved corporate training regimes.

    No, it's just yet another stupid "corporate training regime" designed to separate MBAs from their and everyone else's money. Which wouldn't be a problem, except for the "everyone else" part--companies actually spend money on this kind of crap instead of on things like, you know, salary and benefits for the people who actually do the work that keeps the company in business. And there are more and more of these parasites infecting the corporate world every year, which ought to be enough to convince the Invisible Hand cultists that maybe there's something wrong with their cherished idea that the market weeds out inefficient management ... except they're all too busy congratulating themselves on buying into the latest bullshit fad to pay attention.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:Oh, bullshit. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Commie. My skepticism about the invisible hand totally fucking vanished when I learned that I could spend other people's money to pay it to give me invisible handjobs.

      Clearly, you are just a envy-driven agent of class warfare and collectivism.

    2. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Okay, you caught me. Guess I'll have to find some other group of running-dog lackeys to subvert to the cause of the glorious peoples' revolution of the international brotherhood of the proletariat. ;)

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Oh, bullshit. by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      No, it's just yet another stupid "corporate training regime" designed to separate MBAs from their and everyone else's money.

      FTFA

      Lasleyâ(TM)s company, Edw. C. Levy Co., helps steel companies turn slag material into cement, road paving, and other products. It has sent a few dozen people through the Pendaran program and noted a 60 percent to 70 percent safety improvement among those teams, which translated into a $1 million annual savings from higher productivity. Now the company looks to put the majority of its 1,800 people through the course. âoeThe first three days may be the worst thing you can imagine, but then the clouds part and real change happens,â Lasley says.

      Injuries and safety violations are measurable metrics.

      Actually teaching people how to work as a team is not bullshit.
      Bullshit is when a program claims to teach teamwork, but doesn't.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Oh, bullshit. by tragedy · · Score: 1

      So, they sent a few dozen people through the program and got a $1 million annual savings out of it. So we're talking what? $20,000 to $40,000 savings per person? Just how many accidents are these people getting into in the first place? Frankly, it sounds like hyperbole or fishy accounting to me.

    5. Re:Oh, bullshit. by adolf · · Score: 1

      instead of on things like, you know, salary and benefits for the people who actually do the work that keeps the company in business

      In the past ten years, my hourly pay (with the same company) has literally quadrupled.

      Has my work improved because of this? No, not at all: I'm still the same asshole as before. I just know more stuff than I used to, and I'm more expensive than I used to be.

      But having been through the Army's basic training at Fort Gordon, I can see the merit of breaking people down: At the beginning of basic, I knew that I already knew everything. Soon after, it was proven to me that I actually knew nothing*. And toward the end, I began to realize that I did know some things, and that I could learn more, and that I was physically fit to make those things happen.

      It was toward the end that our unit started acting cohesively and supportively, automatically, even though few of us had anything in common.

      (Which, I think, probably happened right on schedule.)

      *: It was around this same time that a drill sgt. said to us "Pushups make you -smarter-." It turned out that he was right.

    6. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Every con man trying to sell you on the latest management fad will show you "measurable metrics" (and will often use silly phrases just like that) to prove that their Latest And Greatest will make things better. Which means, of course, that last year's Latest And Greatest, and the one from the year before that, and the year before that, are all bullshit--but this Latest And Greatest is the real deal! Trust me! We've got metrics!

      Whatever. As a statistician, I smell cherry-picking. And it's amazing how easily you can pick a few cherries out of a big pile of bullshit, if you're willing to dig long enough.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    7. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Rather than repeat myself, I'll just say that I give my reasons for rejecting the idea that this will reap any of the same benefits as military basic training does here. Short version: business isn't war, and the corporate world's half-assed attempts to play soldier are doomed to failure.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    8. Re:Oh, bullshit. by adolf · · Score: 1

      Because...why? Because you say so?

    9. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      For the reasons I gave in the post I linked to, and which other posters expanded on in the thread. If you don't want to bother reading through it [shrug] that's not my problem.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    10. Re:Oh, bullshit. by adolf · · Score: 1

      I did read your post.

      The question stands.

    11. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'll try to explain it again. My three main points:

      1. Business is not war, because under normal circumstances, business does not involve killing people. Microsoft is not going to bomb Google's headquarters. Target submarines are not going to stalk ships carrying goods for Wal-Mart. Ford is not going to dispatch a battalion to move into a GM plant, kill or take prisoner all the GM employees found there, and hold the plant against attempts to take it back.

      2. Corporations are not armies. The most obvious difference is that corporate employees can always walk away. Plenty of people stay with jobs they dislike for financial reasons, of course, but as a rule, in the civilian world your boss can't send you to jail--or put you up against a wall and shoot you!--if you say "to hell with this, I quit." Soldiers don't have that option, nor could armies function if they did.

      3. The types of people involved are different. There are plenty of people in the military, especially officers but a fair number of NCOs as well, who are primarily concerned with climbing the career ladder. Some of them even get MBAs! And they tend to be really lousy soldiers. In peacetime, they're a constant irritation, and in wartime, they get people killed for no good reason. If Uncle Sam's training can't knock the self-absorption and amorality out of these people, where there are a lot fewer of them than there are in the typical corporate environment, it seems unlikely that some bizarre watered-down civilian version will do so, especially when they work in an environment where sociopathy is rewarded and any genuine concern for the welfare of your subordinates is regarded as weakness.

      So there it is. Have I said anything above that you disagree with?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    12. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      One word: Clausewitz.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:Oh, bullshit. by adolf · · Score: 1

      1. Not all military action involves killing people. Sure, war does connotate killing; but not all militaries are at war.

      2. I quit the US Army. They even paid for my ticket home. I did not go to jail, I was not threatened, and nobody shot me for doing so. I am not the only person who has done this.

      3. I think that you just attempted to differentiate two personality types, but actually only managed to show that they're not really very different at all.

    14. Re:Oh, bullshit. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      1. Not all military action involves killing people. Sure, war does connotate killing; but not all militaries are at war.

      A military is either at war, training for war, or a lousy military. I don't know of any fourth option.

      2. I quit the US Army. They even paid for my ticket home. I did not go to jail, I was not threatened, and nobody shot me for doing so. I am not the only person who has done this.

      How exactly did you do that? If you mean you just put in your time and didn't re-enlist, you have to know that's not the same thing as walking off the job.

      3. I think that you just attempted to differentiate two personality types, but actually only managed to show that they're not really very different at all.

      My point is that people like this are a minority in the military, and are generally despised by those who have to put up with them, whereas they absolutely dominate corporate culture.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  10. wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds awesome? wtf happened to /.?

  11. more simulation / hands on training is needed all by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    more simulation / hands on training is needed all over.

    Six Sigma and other beloved corporate training regimes. are seem to be that PHB stuff run by people who don't know much about the real work.

  12. yea but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    works great until an employee an-hero's himself and everyone around him from the stress

  13. Breaking their spirit by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    "After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team."

    I'm pretty sure that after how corporations have been treating workers for the last couple of decades, and especially during the past five years, any spirits the workers have don't need much to be broken.

    1. Re:Breaking their spirit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that after how corporations have been treating workers for the last couple of decades

      That's because you're an idiot. The low-stakes office politics and benign indifference you're thinking of is child's play. The soviets gave people tenners (ten years in a gulag) for being on the wrong side of a boss and showing up late once too often.

    2. Re:Breaking their spirit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have politics. I work for eight hours while a computer clocks my performance and emails my boss if I don't perform as expected. The only changes they have ever implemented have made my life worse, more depressing, and more difficult to escape.

    3. Re:Breaking their spirit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, no, they didn't. Fuck off with your bullshit hyperbole.

  14. Oh that... by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    until we have robots to build and run the tanks and jets that run our military industrial complex and enforce the will and desires of large corporations we still need a few factories. That's why we keep bailing out the auto industry. If we ever go to war for real you can't just build that stuff overnight. Wish I was joking...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Oh that... by countach74 · · Score: 1

      I wish you were joking too. I actually hadn't thought of that as an underlying reason to bail out the auto industry. I thought they just wanted to steal more of my money; I see now they may have killed two birds with one stone.

    2. Re:Oh that... by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      can't moderate, but +1 insightful from me.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    3. Re:Oh that... by ethanms · · Score: 1

      You mean because GM, Ford, Chrysler (the companies) will be given contracts to build the tanks/etc, or do you mean because we need skilled/experienced workers, factories and other infrastructure?

      If it's the latter, I'd argue that bailing out the domestic auto industry is not required. The government could seize any of the foreign factories operating in the US--you think the average line worker at the Hyundai factory in Tennessee is going to say no when he's told he's building tanks now for the US military instead of mini-vans?

      If you're saying we need the companies, well, I think the government would be better off just starting their own factories and design centers--between local police forces, national guard, army, navy, air force, nasa, DHS, etc you think they can't drum up enough internal business to keep things rolling at the various levels needed? Of course they can...

  15. American Cars are fine now by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Europe's a big enough market that we started building them a bit better. Mostly because it was too expensive to run one production line for crap American Cars and one for Decent Euro cars. They're not great, but they'll do 140,000 miles.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:American Cars are fine now by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Europe's a big enough market that we started building them a bit better. Mostly because it was too expensive to run one production line for crap American Cars and one for Decent Euro cars. They're not great, but they'll do 140,000 miles.

      The problem with trying to break into Europe is extreme protectionism. No barriers between Germany and France, but between Germany and anywhere outside the EU is a 25% tax barrier.

      This is why Europeans have to get a Euro car that does 200,000 K's instead of a Japanese car that does 500,000 K's (I sold my EK Civic at 300,000 K's, if the next owner takes care of it it'll run for another 300,000 K's, hell if he runs it into the ground it'll reach 400,000 K's before it dies).

      It's also why Ford has different cars for USDM and EUDM (US Domestic Market and EU Domestic Market) because to be competitive Ford have to manufacture the car in the EU so to make it cheaper they use smaller engines, less features as standard. ADM (Australian) and USD cars are closer despite being RHD to LHD.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:American Cars are fine now by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Yeah... Pretty much every one I know who drives a recent American car routinely gets 100k+ miles. Hell, warranties running 150k+ miles aren't exactly uncommon anymore.

      Pull your head out of your ass and leave the 1960's and join us here in the 21st century.

    3. Re:American Cars are fine now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ford use smaller engines in Europe because literally every single mainstream car manufacturer uses smaller engines, because that's what the market demands. A 2 litre engine is larger than average here. The most common BMWs are 318s, and there are cars with sub-litre engines driven by actual people. I don't really understand that, I drive a 330, but that's what people want. There isn't the phenomenon in the US where a Camry needs a 3l V6 or it's "underpowered".

      I don't know what you're talking about with options.

    4. Re:American Cars are fine now by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      This is why Europeans have to get a Euro car that does 200,000 K's instead of a Japanese car that does 500,000 K's

      That must be why I've never ever seen a Honda or a Toyota, or a Hyundai.

      OK, the latter are Korean, but I doubt you'd know the difference.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:American Cars are fine now by mjwx · · Score: 1

      This is why Europeans have to get a Euro car that does 200,000 K's instead of a Japanese car that does 500,000 K's

      That must be why I've never ever seen a Honda or a Toyota, or a Hyundai.

      OK, the latter are Korean, but I doubt you'd know the difference.

      I'd know the difference being a connoisseur of JDM cars but I think it's clear you dont.

      In case you missed the point, it's because of Europe's protectionism. Toyota manufactures the Euro Yaris in Fracne, the Auris and Avensis in the UK, the Dyno, Hiace and Optimo in Portugal to get around this.

      Germany pays EUR 29,990 (US$39,396) for a Toyota 86 (Scion FR-S for the 'Muricans) where as Americans pay around US$25-29,000 depending on the model, options and local taxes and Australia (the land of overpriced cars) is a mere A$29,000 (US$32,000) incl tax drive away. Why, because Germany has a tax on imported cars.

      The reason pure JDM cars like Sylvias, Skylines, Integras(RSX for the yanks), S2000s and Supras are rare as rocking horse poo in Europe is because they were never manufactured in Europe and couldn't be made competitive with European performance cars with the import levies.

      The reason you don't know the difference between Korean and Japanese manufacture is because you've never driven any real JDM cars. You wont get much of a difference between a Camry and i30 (yep, they're both shit) but a brand new i45 couldn't hope to have a shadow on how a 9 yr old Integra Type R or S performs or handles. The Camry gets built to a price, the Integra was made to a standard, I'm certain Korean cars will get to the same point where a model is made to a standard, but not yet and certainly not in Hyundai's i series.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    6. Re:American Cars are fine now by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Ford use smaller engines in Europe because literally every single mainstream car manufacturer uses smaller engines, because that's what the market demands. A 2 litre engine is larger than average here. The most common BMWs are 318s, and there are cars with sub-litre engines driven by actual people. I don't really understand that, I drive a 330, but that's what people want. There isn't the phenomenon in the US where a Camry needs a 3l V6 or it's "underpowered".

      I don't know what you're talking about with options.

      The market doesn't really demand it, again, its government.

      Europe has really high taxes on large engines. Manufacturers really dont have a choice. This is why a Toyta Auris has a 1.3L engine in Europe but an Australian Toyota Corolla Hatch is a 1.8L. The market isn't demanding smaller engines, it's demanding lower prices and manufacturers are meeting that with smaller engines.

      As for features, this is everything from climate control to seat warmers to LSD's (Limited Slip Differentials). European base models aren't sold in Australia

      There isn't the phenomenon in the US where a Camry needs a 3l V6 or it's "underpowered".

      The US has it's own "special" problems.

      Europe's problem is that in order to skirt emissions laws (which some are based on engine sizes) manufacturers are shrinking engine sizes and putting turbo's on to compensate. This has two problems in that 1) turbos tend to break sooner and 2) turbos actually increase emissions.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  16. ...military crap... there's better methods by Mirar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I believe I did this in the military, in the basic training (you know, the part where a drill sergeant shouts at you a lot).

    It was called "team building exercises".

    It did wonders to make us see all officers as idiots.

    Sure, it also made us help each other along the exercises and get to see the worst sides of each other. But I don't think it made us a more lean team. Really not worth the cost of how much we learned to hate the military and it's idiots.

    Doing that kind of crap to team up factory workers? Eh.

    Send them out on a week long survival course (one where you actually learn something and get to enjoy the nature) or even better, have them team up in paintball teams for a week. Or build fighting robots together, why not, without the shouting.
    Don't even have to involve actors. That would be enough to have them work together as a team, and they wouldn't actually hate the bosses' guts for the rest of their life.

    Only idiots deserve to get shouted at. Ever.

    1. Re:...military crap... there's better methods by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Really not worth the cost of how much we learned to hate the military and it's idiots.

      You're an outlier - experience proves that in the real world, over the long run, it does work for the vast majority of the trainees.

    2. Re:...military crap... there's better methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Send them out on a week long survival course ...

      I think the article is describing the teamwork version. If you don't learn how to track a rabbit, only you goes hungry. While being sore, cold, hungry, exhausted teaches one that real feel-good decisions solve immediate problems, that is irrelevant in a business environment where one will not be fired/injured by pettiness/laziness/grand-standing. In the team environment someone can always goldbrick/bludge or pass the blame.

    3. Re:...military crap... there's better methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find the remove the individual streak part disturbing. I got sent on one of these team building exercises once and whils the rest of the 'team' were having a lively debate about what to do first I had allready builty myself a small shelter.

      needless to say I failed.

  17. Arbeit macht frei by PPH · · Score: 2

    Over the factory gates.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  18. Dad? by d'baba · · Score: 2

    Is that you?

  19. Sounds like every other factory.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This comes from people that never worked within an assembly line, which is basically "shut up and do your work, youre not paid for thinking here". In case there is a problem it is usually your fault because no one would expect that there are faulty parts. With that being presented hours or days later after you finished that work trying to tell what went wrong is like trying to tell what you had for breakfast 5 weeks ago - depending on the lines speed. The fun starts when someone created a bogus report that mixed any possible source in a single keyword and tells you it was all your fault.

    Where is that different from being yelled at by some actor? Managers in factories are not payed for their job, they receive a fee per convincing performance.

  20. Hazing? by tragedy · · Score: 1

    I've always wondered about these sorts of worker training programs. The boot camps, the firewalking, paintball, etc. If they're mandatory, how are they not a form of hazing?

  21. They should try this in Italy by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    fortunately we have universal healthcare, so the "trainers" wouldn't get a big bill on top of the beating.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  22. Holy hits batman by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    Parent managed to get Role Playing, manic, simulation, broken, and well-oiled into one article. Google is going to be sending some seriously confused people to this article.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  23. From the Desk of Linus Torvalds by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 5, Funny

    " After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team"

    Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    L Torvalds

    --
    It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    1. Re:From the Desk of Linus Torvalds by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The first thing to make me laugh, all day. :D

    2. Re:From the Desk of Linus Torvalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly I read /. enough to understand your humor LOL

  24. Factory training could be more realistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Make everything as boring as possible to the point of snoring
    2) Run a truly impressive blonde secretary on a random errand through the factory floor every now and then
    3) Watch the mistakes and accidents

    ?) Profit

    1. Re:Factory training could be more realistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in fashion retail. There are at least 500 hot 20 something girls in this office. It's a minor miracle any of the straight guys get a single thing done.

      Wouldn't trade it for any other job.

  25. Er.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 3

    >After their spirits get broken, the workers actually start functioning as a well-oiled team.

    You should know you can learn to work as a well oiled team without breaking anyone's spirits.
    Usually it involves good communication, clear roles, sensible motivation structures and weeding out the dickheads.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Er.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > and weeding out the dickheads.

      That's the most important part right there. Then once you finally figure out who the non-dickheads are, you pay them decently and give them benefits. Not exactly what unions want to do, or even most companies, but in reality, its the fair way to do things, and the most effective.

  26. seems familiar by kallen3 · · Score: 1

    sounds an awful lot like military basic training.

  27. How is this revolutionary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This just describes the standard stages of team building:

    Storming : total chaos, no one knows who's in charge, roles, etc...

    Forming: The team starts to coalesce and the goals start to be realized

    Norming: You've reached equilibrium and the team is formed, work is near optimum for the team barring outside enhancers (more training, etc...)

    Reforming: Oscillation between norming/reforming barring, again, outside influences as new projects/priorities disrupt the norming but which quickly resettle back as they've moved beyond the storming/forming (or it can looked at as these stages happen so quickly for an already normed team that they are just one stage perturbation.)

    The only thing that I see as inovative is the actual hands on long term role playing aspect of it.

    -rs

  28. Sounds reasonable by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Take away someones humanity and you take away human error?

  29. You might try and RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The example company ran a few dozen people through it, causing quite a bit in savings. Apparently enough so that the rest will be sent through too. Pays for itself then, see?

  30. RTFA - It's actually quite interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this is Slashdot, and you're all obligated to make snarky judgments based on the summary, but the summary's taking you all for quite a ride. Read the article - the training basically gives you a chance to roleplay screwing up enough to where you learn not to. It's not about dehumanizing people as much as it is getting everyone on the same level (e.g. with the nicknames) and giving people a chance to screw up without actually hurting anything. The screwing up leads to frustration which leads to giving people incentives to get it right - you don't forget lessons learned from having something blow up in your face. Apparently after this training, this one company had a 70% reduction in safety issues which translated to $1,000,000/year savings. For all you people suggesting they should just give them raises... well... at least this way the company has extra money to do that with. Now who's willing to bet that's *not* where the money gets spent? Anyway, go read it.

  31. Baskin-Robbins Manufacturing by some+old+guy · · Score: 2

    Wow, just what we need to stay competitive...another "flavor of the month" management scheme.

    Add this to Quality Circles, TQM, 5-S, Six-Sigma, LEAN, and all the rest of the psychobabble bullshit. This is what happens when MBAs and HR types try to do what engineers are taught to do.

    Maybe if the bean-counters didn't fuck the process up in the first place with impossible OE and COMG KPI's, revolving-door personnel policies, zeroed-out training budgets, and Run to Fail maintenance programs, they wouldn't need to piss money aware on ludicrous self-congratulation seminars.

    --
    Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
    1. Re:Baskin-Robbins Manufacturing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are clearly not a team player.

  32. Waste of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boot camp for pre-robots.

  33. not going to work by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    I would probably hit the virtual or real person screaming at me. What really would work is forcing everyone to come to work as a traditional D&D role playing class. I work much better as an archer or wizard.

  34. They forgot something. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In order to keep them productive they need to build them backup. That's how the military does it. They tear everyone down, weed out the people who can't take it, then build the people who are left back up so they become strong confident individuals who are great at team work.

  35. Inhumane and Perverted by emaname · · Score: 2

    This sounds too much like the robber barons are regaining control. Workers are simply a resource (like water or electricity) meant to be consumed while incurring as little cost as possible and ultimately discarded.

    Having been in the military, I can say without fear of contradiction, that this is what boot camp was back during the Vietnam "conflict." It also was my son's experience during Desert Storm. Now, from what I hear, the DI's have been backed off somewhat. Nothing like the scene from "Full Metal Jacket."

    Just wait until someone with a sketchy psych profile is in the mix and somebody gets killed or commits suicide.

    --
    An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
  36. The beatings will continue ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this just a variant of putting your "knowledge workers" in a cubicle farm? You dehumanize, disrespect, and demand ... the result is a lot of "followers" and that's what most businesses want. But then _most_ businesses don't need innovation or independent thought, just the "working dead" staggering though the usual routine ("Uuulllrrrraaa, I want to eat your brains!").

    Man am I glad I don't work in a cubicle farm anymore!

  37. i normally don't endorse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    simply killing someone, but people endorsing this need spay/neuter, at a minimum

  38. Not the Worst Thing Ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is actually reasonable.

    A group of functional, well adjusted, cooperative (with each other) and observant people would be through this in no time.

    The reason this is hell is because the participants are none of these.

    The participants are my co-workers, and sometimes it takes a (simulated) beating to make them realize that they are being rediculous.

  39. "well-oiled team"? by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    The expression is a well-oiled machine.

    A well-oiled team? Well, that's just kinky.