by Serge
Definition of Problem
Problems
arise when group members begin to act on emotional impulse when dealing with
unknowns, in place of calm collective analysis.
Emotional responses can beget a negative psychological climate that
spreads throughout the crew and creates a breakdown in the vital unity
needed to be maintained for the safety and soul success of the mission.
Emotional responses beget one another which amount to fractioning or
in this case, mutinous behavior that challenges the ability of the Mission
Commander to do his job.
1. Symptoms
When
tactics employed by individuals of specialized fields are misinterpreted by
colleagues as somehow being of ill intent, the initial response is to from
hence forth withhold details on one’s activities lest they similarly be
immediately improperly judged. This
amounts to general distrust within the group which leads to fractioning as
individuals may feel placed on the defense and therefore seek allies. Such also inhibits work performance and overall base moral.
2. Aspect
A
“suit-case nuke” could have several implications by 2080s and in spite
of the term’s alarming affiliations from a late 20th century
view, it may be a common, non-lethal device.
Unfortunately, the manifestation of a suit-case nuke (note: it was
never referred to as a “bomb”) brought forth immediate emotional
responses whereby assumptions were used in place of facts and near hysteria
erupted that threatened to
undermine the actual intent of the ‘device delivery’ and potentially
amount to a self-fulfilling crisis.
From
the viewpoint of the Mission Commander, the presentation of the device would
be a dramatic means of securing the attention and especially the curiosity
of the Cydorian team. The
device would send a strong, though unclear, signal and reflect the
impression that while each team was going about its own business, the
presence of the Cydorians was very much on the mind of the Candorians.
Hence, through the symbolic gesture, communication between bases
would become a priority to the Cydorians.
There was in fact very little threat of them taking the action as a
hostile act. A suit-case nuke
is too dramatic to be taken literal whereas say, a smaller more plausible
object such as a pipe-bomb, would likely have invoked a negative response.
Further, the included note which read “So long suckers!” does not
convey any sort of seriousness that an actual declaration of war would
entail. The notion of an atomic
explosion being connected with a juvenile little comment is so absurd in
that it invokes the playfulness of a Bugs Bunny cartoon rather than an act
of mass murder. The humor was
received, the ice was broken and the mock crisis created an opportunity for
immediate cooperation and gratitude between bases.
Mission accomplished.
Ironically,
the only crisis that ever existed at any state in time regarding the
suit-case was in the minds of certain Candorians.
Some perceived the act as mischievous without any intended cause
except to create conflict. Others
may have been disappointed that beginning of base-to-base relations had
already been initiated through an informal individual act rather than any
sort of ceremonious meeting of representatives.
The dissenting crew members were the only ones vocalizing their
response. They may very well represent only a minority opinion wherein
other members understood the benefit of such tactics and were perhaps even
awaiting the coming response. As
for the Cydonians, they would have found the object on ‘neutral’ ground,
being that it was left on the LEO, they therefore wouldn’t have known who
it was from or to whom it was intended.
The object was left in a general area where only a few unoccupied
personas were left resting. As
it happened, the Cydonians assumed the object came from one of their number
and rightly took its presence as a playful gesture.
3. Scope
The
event affected the entire Candor crew though there was little response
within its actual target, the Cydonians.
In case of the latter it seems to have only been seen as a random
manifestation of little significance though it did pose mystery as to who
had made it. While the presence of the suitcase did not set off any
immediate reaction that affected base relations, it did rattle what unity
had existed within the Candor Team.
4. Causes
The
aspects of such irrational acting are in need of dire examination.
Why would certain members of the crew proclaim to be so alarmed at
the implications of a harmless device?
The ‘delivery’ was employed as an ice breaker to set off positive
relations with a foreign base. In
that regard, it was highly successful.
Resentment was likely a factor in the response it received.
The distinctions between the base “ambassador” and Mission
Commander have never been completely defined and the two were initially both
addressed as being base representatives.
The former likely resented seeing what she saw as her role being
overtaken by a colleague. Her
response was therefore emotionally charged in that she perceived her
position as threatened. In
retaliation, she accused the primary actor as having jeopardized
base-to-base relations, thus conveniently creating a “problem” that
existed as only speculation and not fact, whereby her expertise would be
employed to diffuse the fictional situation, thereby making her the savior
and her perceived competitor the villain.
(Ironically, her proposed treaty/apology to be sent to Cydonia would
have been received as a confirmation of aggressive actions by apologizing
for it, when none existed.)
Why
then, were other crew members vocal in their disapproval of the suit-case?
Though no one is going to say it upfront, the vocal crowd was very
gender-aligned. Fractioning is
inevitable to some degree within the crew and when the female
“ambassador” suddenly felt threatened by a male counterpart whose
tactics and general approach could be seen as aggressive, it was perhaps an
instinctive response from the other female crew members to come to the aid
of their ‘sister.’ There
was no attempt to seriously contemplate the pros and cons or the various
possible outcomes of the situation, only to assume the absolute worse.
This is what happens when emotions are employed in place of reason.
It’s worth noting that there were no definitive objections from the
male portion of the crew. Many
made jokes but for the most part seemed to follow the line of the ambassador
as a default, not a conviction.
6. Solutions
One
could argue that open communication may have only created a problem where
there was none. Perhaps as it
often is, the leader should withhold certain bits of information that the
crew may not be able to properly digest, if they are unfamiliar with the
methodologies employed by the leader. Openness
would not have been a problem though if critical thinking had been properly
employed by ‘concerned’ crew members instead of jumping to rash
conclusions. Further, clarity needs to be made where individual
occupations may overlap in some areas, as to what is expected of whom, so
any sense of unproductive competition is avoided.
Further, the social gender-divide needs to be acknowledged and
properly neutered.
7. Issues
Critical
thinking needs to take priority as far as proposed solutions.
When dealing with such a fragile environment as a contained base and
the likely facing of new unexpected situations that Mars has to offer, crew
members need to be conditioned to examine multiply possibilities and to
prepare accordingly. Having
worst-case assumptions as a default is not productive and may even create
problems where none exist. When
misunderstanding arises, it is vital that understanding is sought and the
separate perception of another is realized instead of tossing out baseless
accusations. To survive in an
alien world we need to be able to think flexibly.
Not
to mention having a sense of humor for frack’s sake.
