Performance and personality: Reactivity - the monkey business!

Summary: [You might view earlier posts “Are we bound by type?”, “Motivated drives”, “The need to win”]. Reactivity can be dangerous if handled poorly, especially in diversity. What rules perhaps is ignorance of language and culture, a distorted need for achievement and mental ill-health.


How does personality relate to performance? In the Australia-India test cricket series 2007, inept handling of situations by match officials on the turf itself spun matters out of control. And with the charge of racism being lodged, game performance aside, the series itself was put to jeopardy.

Bias?

Do consistent winners make fewer mistakes, and are they more honest in actions than others? Not so, but because of the record status, it’s often presumed so. The manner in which they report, appeal, claim a catch or stand ground can bias rulings in their favour, and which they may well count on.

Did an Indian player racially abuse an Australian player during the 2nd cricket test match in Sydney, calling him a monkey?

The on-field umpires didn’t hear it; the Indians vehemently denied it; video footage from cameras around the ground didn’t have it on record.

But satisfied with the hearsay evidence from some of the Australian squad, the arbitrators opted to ban the Indian player for 3 matches - appeal pending, of course.

Or ignorance?

Many say both charge and ruling actually an exhibition of ignorance of language and culture.

Firstly, in Indian mythology, the monkey god is the very symbol of power and prowess. Sportsmen and soldiers invoke his name and blessings for success on any mission. Culturally, the word is hardly satisfying to vent with!

Secondly, the m-word has been used to refer to people of colour – Asians, as in the notable case of Republican George Allen. In the cricket match, what colour would the ethnic Indian be defending against the ethnic Australian?

Finally, the English language isn’t a strong point for many of team India, including the accused. Reports that say he voiced a Hindi/Punjabi expletive may well be right. “Maaki…” does sound phonetically similar!

[Update: Eventually the appeals commissioner found no evidence of racism and revoked the ban. However, since this followed an Indian threat to pullout, the Australians cried foul!]

Goes around, comes around

Many around the world suspect the ‘racism’ issue a strategic ploy to decimate the opponents’ bowling talents in ways other than with superior batting. A ban on the premier spin bowler would effectively remove that threat from the equation!

The point is what goes around, e.g. sledging, comes around. In the Australia-India cricket series as often in business competitiveness, we may have been looking at the same distorted need for achievement affecting both sides.

Sports need spectators/viewers just as businesses are concerned with customers. But if group energy is focused on other than best performances, the ‘product’ attraction and its market may soon be lost. The consumer, with choice and buying clout in hand, eventually wants value for money.

Let’s examine adaptation next…