A constancy assumption implies that what has been true in the past will be true in the future, or that what is true here, in this situation, is also true there, in the same situation. We tend to regard constancy assumptions as more factual when they've been valid for longer periods, or when they've been validated in more places. That is, the more examples we have of their validity, the more likely we are to regard them as facts, rather than assumptions.
And that's when we're at risk of making big mistakes. Constancy assumptions are usually subject to defects related to context. For example, when we apply the brakes on a bicycle, our experience is that the bicycle will slow and eventually stop. At least, this has happened so many times that we expect it will always happen. But on icy roads, or rainy days, or when the bicycle has just gone through a puddle, the brakes might not be so effective. Our constancy assumption might be violated.
Some constancy assumptions are more likely to be invalidated as the number of examples of validity increases. For example, when people are required to accept yet another year of inadequate pay raises, their tolerance is tested each year, but they generally accept paltry increases. Eventually, though, the level of pay falls far enough below their needs, or below what other employers offer, and their acquiescence ends. Those employees who are the most attractive to other employers then find employment elsewhere.
Here are some examples of constancy assumptions that are sometimes inappropriately regarded as facts.
- Productivity rates
- Estimating the person hours required to execute projects is a delicate art. We try to convert art into science by collecting and using experience data, but that data can be misleading. For example, when our workforce ages even by a few years, the demands of home life can change, and those changes affect productivity.
- Personal trustworthiness
- When personal circumstances change, people make different choices and change their alliances, We tend to regard constancy assumptions
as more factual when their pasts
are longer, or when they've been
validated in more placesnot because their values change, but because their goals and tactics do. Somebody you distrusted last year might be trustworthy this year, and vice versa.
- Supervisory relationships
- Cultivating a strong relationship with your supervisor is almost always worthwhile, but reorganization or a change of supervisor can nearly erase that investment overnight.
- The value of annual compensation
- In most national economies, inflation is slow but steady, and it erodes everyone's compensation. Other sources of compensation erosion are pay cuts, layoffs, and benefits reductions. Assuming that compensation is constant or increasing is probably risky. Save.
Perhaps the most widespread constancy assumption concerns the possibility or necessity of finding a new job. People tend to assume that their current positions will endure. They stay in their jobs, often unhappy and underpaid, rather than exploring opportunities elsewhere, until too late. Are you among their number? Top Next Issue
Love the work but not the job? Bad boss, long commute, troubling ethical questions, hateful colleague? This ebook looks at what we can do to get more out of life at work. It helps you get moving again! Read Go For It! Sometimes It's Easier If You Run, filled with tips and techniques for putting zing into your work life. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrensSJgQmneoVKosCGxner@ChacjecZUILQVmOjaAdeoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Critical Thinking at Work:
- The Fundamental Attribution Error
- When we try to understand the behavior of others, we often make a particularly human mistake. We tend
to attribute too much to character and disposition and too little to situation and context. When we
seek a better balance, we can adopt a more accepting view of events around us.
- Believe It or Else
- When we use threats and intimidation to win debates or agreement, we lay a flimsy foundation for future
action. Using fear may win the point, but little more.
- Ten Reasons Why You Don't Always Get What You Measure: II
- Although many believe that "You get what you measure," metrics-based management systems sometimes
produce disappointing results. In this Part II, we look at the effects of employee behavior.
- The Nominal Fallacy at Work
- Using logical fallacies at work — intentionally or otherwise — costs real money. The nominal
fallacy is probably responsible for much delay in addressing our real problems.
- Cognitive Biases and Influence: II
- Most advice about influencing others offers intentional tactics. Yet, the techniques we actually use
are often unintentional, and we're therefore unaware of them. Among these are tactics exploiting cognitive
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming October 25: Workplace Memes
- Some patterns of workplace society reduce organizational effectiveness in ways that often escape our notice. Here are five examples. Available here and by RSS on October 25.
- And on November 1: Risk Creep: I
- Risk creep is a term that describes the insidious and unrecognized increase in risk that occurs despite our every effort to mitigate risk or avoid it altogether. What are the dominant sources of risk creep? Available here and by RSS on November 1.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenQcPnUBQcHrJujEglner@ChacETeEfNSxSzuzqMGroCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- Ten Project Management Fallacies: The Power of Avoiding Hazards
- Most of what we know about managing projects is useful and effective, but some of what we know "just ain't so." Identifying the fallacies of project management reduces risk and enhances your ability to complete projects successfully. Even more important, avoiding these traps can demonstrate the value and power of the project management profession in general, and your personal capabilities in particular. In this program we describe ten of these beliefs. There are almost certainly many more, but these ten are a good start. We'll explore the situations where these fallacies are most likely to expose projects to risk, and suggest techniques for avoiding them. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.