A Case Against Competition
1 May 2003
Raised in the USA one is exposed to competition early and often. From races with a sibling to youth sports to a growing awareness of how competition works in the free enterprise system, children realize that competing effectively provides momentary lifts to self esteem and may ultimately lead to the right schools, the right careers and the right ”station in life.”
We reinforce this notion with professional athletics in which we pay entertainers enormous sums to do whatever it is they do. Lately, they do it as individuals rather than as teams. The sense of collaboration and teamwork that we thought we were fostering has given rise to a new breed of thugs. We’re not building character – we’re building characters.
In business we see so much evidence of the law of unintended consequences. Rather than lifting people’s minds to higher and better things, we’ve entered an era in which public figures in athletics are merely an extension of the Hollywood bunch. Their senses of entitlement, being above the rules and behaving recklessly are honed to a fine edge.
Ever since I read No Contest by Alfie Kohn followed by Punished By Rewards by the same author, I’ve sensed that something is wrong with the way we teach and practice competition. We’re reaping unintended consequences by teaching kids how to elbow their way to victory and on ”to the top.” If the ref doesn’t see the thrown elbow, you’re labeled ”shrewd.” If you’re called for it, some commentator will say, ”that sometimes happens to the kids who play the game aggressively.” No one ever mentions flaunting the rules, harming your fellow man or moral bankruptcy.
Deming wasn’t focused on competition. He was focused on those attributes of a business that permitted the company to survive, thrive and continue in a way that met the needs of customers and employees alike. We’re sticking the hero’s tag on the wrong people these days. Somehow, we’ve got to raise a generation that understands what is uplifting, what is valuable and what the long-term benefits of collaborating rather than competing can truly be.
Before I’m accused of advocating socialism, I’ll flatly and emphatically state that I don’t and I won’t. Competition in markets is healthy. Collaboration in markets can also be healthy when done within the laws boundaries. Dave gave a clear picture just this morning of the differences between ”good competition” and ”bad competition.”
Where will we look to again build a man’s man who is as comfortable at the gallery, the ballet or the Saturday afternoon football game?
Our miserable individuality is screwed to the back of our cars in the form of personalised license plates.
Filed under: Thinking