Sunday, January 20, 2013

When does a Freudian slip become an intentional warning?

When does a Freudian slip become an intentional warning?

All of you, at some time or another, have experienced the following. You report to someone at work for many years, and then all of a sudden that person is no longer there. The dismissal becomes more impactful if the person removed was a key component in the organizational chart.
The episode transforms organizational comfort to fear, replaces a known entity with an uncertain one, and finally, it creates an ambiguous future for everyone. Only those at the very top of the pyramid can explain the change, but they are not talking.
When such a change occurs, it typically means one thing; the person charged with completing a key task was unable to bring it to fruition. In some instances, before the hammer falls, that person may have been subjected to increased scrutiny, pressure and accountability, but in some instances he becomes as dispensable as a Manchurian Candidate. In the latter example, it is intended to punish as well as set an example, and pre-set the agenda for the incoming replacement. It will also warn all concerned of their own expendability.
I hope you understand the meaning of this message.

Thank you,
Joseph Pede

1 comment:

Tyler West said...

Somebody is Biden his time. Yes, we are listening.