Dreams will get you nowhere, a good kick in the pants will take you a long way.
Baltasar Gracian (http://bit.ly/VPkM8b).
We seem to live in a society where challenging the rules is the norm rather than the exception.
Watching the world cup one can see dreams dashed, individual players acting beyond all reasonable boundaries in biting, tackling without restraint and jumping into backs of other players to keep their dreams alive. I would suggest that the referees are not enforcing the laws sufficiently to stop unacceptable behaviours. Similarly, why can FIFA’s censure stop future acts by such players?
The rules in business are less clear – some written, some embedded in culture of the organisation and some in the legal frameworks that support businesses as a whole. Immediate censure is possible through peers reacting to actions by individuals that do not meet the ‘culture’ or value standards of an organisations. Other breaches of process rules follow process to determine the extent of loss and fault. Legal breached take a long time to stop and culprits will try to find ways of escaping their punishment. Enforcement of any of these ‘rules’ can be like a delayed chemical reaction, the size of reaction does not have to be proportionate to the action if the aim is to stop breaches of rules.
One hopes for consistency of reaction no matter what the status of the individual is. However, FIFA and referees seem to be more lenient on stars, so are businesses.
Either way, a good kick in the pants should be designed to stop unacceptable behaviour and create examples of those who did not obey the rules.
If the rules do not work they have to be changed – in rugby, one has the ability to replay the incidents, which helps the referee but slows down the game. So does one want a clean game to protect the individual or a fast game in order to deliver on the entertainment expectations? Your views?