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? rbrenYMLJeQjopXjVbBdrner@ChacSPvnqsvYLfBLXKnhoCanyon.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:
- 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.
- Recovering Time: I
- Where do the days go? How can it be that we spend eight, ten, or twelve hours at work each day and get
so little done? To recover time, limit the fragmentation of your day. Here are some tips for structuring
your working day in larger chunks.
- Working Lunches
- To save time, or to find a time everyone has free, we sometimes meet during lunch. It seems like a good
idea, but there are some hidden costs.
- Forward Backtracking
- The nastiest part about solving complex problems isn't their complexity. It's the feeling of being overwhelmed
when we realize we haven't a clue about how to get from where we are to where we need to be. Here's
one way to get a clue.
- Motivation and the Reification Error
- We commit the reification error when we assume, incorrectly, that we can treat abstract constructs as
if they were real objects. It's a common error when we try to motivate people.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming February 27: Brainstorming and Speedstorming: II
- Recent research into the effectiveness of brainstorming has raised some questions. Motivated to examine alternatives, I ran into speedstorming. Here's Part II of an exploration of the properties of speedstorming. Available here and by RSS on February 27.
- And on March 6: A Pain Scale for Meetings
- Most meetings could be shorter, less frequent, and more productive than they are. Part of the problem is that we don't realize how much we do to get in our own way. If we track the incidents of dysfunctional activity, we can use the data to spot trends and take corrective action. Available here and by RSS on March 6.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenpnYupHcRvlkOvCgTner@ChacVshQeKXraWCBECOvoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, 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
- 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.