another Hatted head

November 8, 2011 By 3 Comments

Photobucket

Alexandra has joined the hatted ranks of the Wakefield Doctrine, from Lyckeby, Sweden.  Isn’t that a great hat?  And a beautiful building with fabulous details.  I do hope she chooses to tell us a bit about it, since it is the land mark she chose to have her picture taken in front of!

Reading her blog, it is easy to see how much she loves her beautiful dog Lisen, delicious food, tid-bits of history and walks everywhere.  If you do an image search of Lyckeby, Sweden, you will find she is responsible for most of the top rated photos.  She has such an eye for details — just take a look at the photos below.

Photobucket

Photobucket

Her motto is: Good intentions = Good results.

She says of herself…

I’m a believer in “law of attraction”. I am also convinced of that the only thing you should concern yourself with is your own intentions, if they are good – everything will always turn out for the best in the end.

When Alexandra first visited us, she said, “Sounds like an interesting theory. Not sure how I can find out which one of clark or scott or roger I am though.”

So how does one find out if they are a clark, scott or roger?  Read though the basic information (found in those little black buttons, top right) and decide which most closely fits your view of the world.  Or, here is the quick rundown:

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,

(“a piece of the action…”)

October 28, 2010 By 1 Comment

Lady Downspring here.  I’ve decided to suit up again.  I quite enjoy it on occasion but I digress.  My first and last Post for this blog was about a year ago.  “What is wrong with that?” you may ask.  Everything and nothing at all.  I am, after all, a clark.  It is within my purview to procrastinate, take for granted, lose urgency/energy, be fearful, wonder that there is anything pertinent I can contribute, castigate myself – wait, that’s reserved for my “other” friends…..  to the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers.  So why would I think I have nothing pertinent, nothing of value to say? What is it that keeps me reading but not writing? Could it be connected to how I view the world? (with fear CY – with fear.  the clue to your clarklike nature lies within the domain of fear.)

 The question and subsequent question of the day for the veteran “25” and new readers alike?  “How does one learn to view the world differently?”,  “Can I view the world differently?”  This presupposes the desire (“shh… no, not now…”) to change how one views the world.  First, let us assume the position (no glenn. get up!) that one has identified oneself as predominantly a clark, scott or roger. What would be next?  If you identified yourself as having clarklike “symptoms” not to worry too much (yet). You will continue to read the Wakefield Doctrine as long as it amuses and challenges you, you can learn from it; you do not find yourself distracted by something else.  If on the other hand you recognize your primary status as that of a scott, (no!. all egos must, I repeat must….….. check at the door) then it depends on how hungry you are and whether there is enough to satisfy you.  Thirdly, if you lay claim to being of rogerian descent then it becomes a little more complex.  Assumptions have been made.  If the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine aligns with your interpretation, with your world view at the moment, Godspeed.

clarks! This session you may sit.  I will speak of our little scottian friends.  “You!  In the seat by the door!  Go get that roger and drag him back here! ” rogers do not like to be told what to do (unless it is by a scottian female – a male roger will always defer to the scottian female.) For more on how the Wakefield Doctrine can be applied to relationships I will refer you to our very own Ms. AKH.)

 To be scottian is to be dominant or submissive (to another scott only).  One or the other.  There are dominant scotts and lesser scotts. (not in a diminutive way)  Keep in mind: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel, you will no doubt catch on quickly to the nuances of the many ways a clark views the world, how a scott views the immediate landscape, and how a roger views the world as it should be.  scotts are high energy individuals with a short attention span.  They make decisions quickly (because they are so certain of themselves).  scotts can be quick to anger however they hardly ever hold a grudge.  And why? scotts are of the present.  They like to be the focus of attention. (down boy, almost finished)

scotts are often misunderstood.  There is no delicate way to say it – they are often thought of as assholes.  Many of them are but more often than not scotts possess a soft, tender side.  My advice:  learn the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers and you will learn how to handle not only the scotts in your life but the clarks and rogers as well.  It may take a little time but once you catch on it can not only be fun but it can bring positive results to both your work life and home life.  Who doesn’t want to live a less complicated life?

View the vid clip and take note to the scotts attempting to establish ranking.  Take further note to the ultimate, good natured (but do not test me) roger that is our Capt. Kirk. (“No way like the Federation way”.)  

Next session:  Where there is a clark there is always a scott/where there is a scott there is always a clark.

 

YouTube Preview Image(a piece of the action….”)

 

 

 

Share
Filed Under: About the Wakefield Doctrine aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, Featured Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Deprived of meaningful work, men and women lose their reason for existence; they go stark, raving mad

April 5, 2010 By Leave a Comment

Case Study 1
(being the practical application of the Wakefield Doctrine to the workplace)
(…this had better work…)

We often talk about presenting the Doctrine in a context that offers a practical application (of it’s principles).  Today we begin a series based on a ‘Case Study’ of the Wakefield Doctrine as it can be used to understand and change a real life situation.  First a definition, a ’Case Study’  being:

‘Case study’ refers to the collection and presentation of detailed information about a particular participant or small group, frequently including the accounts of subjects themselves.  A form of qualitative descriptive research, (a) case study looks intensely at an individual… drawing conclusions only about that participant or group and only in that specific context….(CSU definition)
 

(As all our Readers know, the Wakefield Doctrine has a number of writers and contributors referred to as Progenitors and Downsprings, this little case study comes to us courtesy of one of our Downsprings).
Downspring#1 is the subject of this ’Case Study’ and she will be sharing her experiences as she attempts to apply the Wakefield Doctrine the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers), to her (new) employment situation.  We will follow her adventures and will have commentary from (other) Progenitors and Downsprings.

 

Downspring#1:

“My employment odyssey began with a box of saltine crackers.  I was in need of Saltines, noticed that Groceryland had a very good sale on them and immediately drove to the store for my purchase.  Walking up to the store, I could not help but to notice a sign on the door stating that (Groceryland) was hiring “for all positions”.  After buying the Saltines, I went to the Customer Service Desk and asked for an (employment) application.  Somewhat uncharacteristically, I asked the woman behind the counter how the turnout was.  She appeared to be a bit at a loss for words, clearly wanting to use the word  “loser” to describe most applicants,  but settled for “not sensible”.  She told me that when I brought back my completed application, I was to ask for a Mr. Rogers.  I thanked her and returned an hour later, employment application in hand.   Mr. Rogers looked over my resume and asked what position I was seeking.  I gave him a list of what I thought I wanted to do, the last item (on my list) being ‘cashier’.  I was then informed that ‘everyone started as a cashier’.  Thinking to myself, ‘why did he even ask what position I would like?’ and refraining  from saying I could handle the District Manager position, I agreed.  He closed the interview by telling me that he would call me the next day.  (Turned out it was 2 days later), but he did call and told me I was hired provided that  I passed the background check and the drug test.   Five days of training later I was on my way to becoming a cashier.”

“I was hired at the end of February as a cashier,  to work at the local branch of Groceryland’s.  I am one of over 50,000 associates employed.  It has been an organization committed to”giving back” to the community since their first store opened in 1925.”

“Groceryland” corporate headquarters are located in Jacksonville, FL.  The store I am employed in is located further south on the east coast of FL.  The market we serve is somewhat diverse.  It is a beach town and although there is a small affluent population we primarily serve the blue collar demographic of town.  The store is open 7:00 am to 11:00 pm 363 days of the year.” 

“As a part time employee, I was told my hours would be anywhere from 15 to 30 hours a week.  Hm.  My first week was about 35 hours. (and have been called to come in on my day off to fill in twice) I have never worked less than 29 hours/week so far.  The schedule is rather varied as I gave my availability as full range 7:00 am to 11:00 pm.  Yes, it does wreak havoc with sleep and life in general.  Consecutive days off are rarely given.” 

“A full month plus has now passed since I entered the employ of “Groceryland” and I must ask myself several questions: 
1) How can the Wakefield Doctrine benefit me/my interactions in this particular environment? 
2) Or put more directly, What is the value of the Wakefield Doctrine to me in the situation described above? ” 

YouTube Preview Image

There we have it,  a real person in a real-life situation asking if the Wakefield Doctrine has any damn practical value.
It is nice of Downspring#1 to ask us how the Doctrine can be used to help her situation, and to show how much we appreciate her interest, we will bring in a scott and a roger.  It is a basic tenet of the Doctrine that all people have the qualities of each type (clarks, scotts and rogers) and that it is only a predominance of one (of these three) that accounts for any of us being what we are, i.e.  clark or a scott or a roger.  Further, the Doctrine is based on the notion that each of these three types perceive the world differently.  It follows that getting a different perspective on a situation/problem is the only reasonable approach.

It has been said that the Wakefield Doctrine is a tool by which if we can identify a person as a clark, scott or roger we then know how they view the world and if we know how a person views the world we can know how they will act/react to that world. (“twew, its twew” Madelaine Kahn  Blazing Saddles)

So in the next installment, Downspring#1 will present us with a more detailed account of the workplace she finds herself in, with attention to (her) interactions with her co-workers as well as her managers and supervisors.  So stay tuned….

Also coming up this week, an Interview with a Reader that we have not heard from before! 
MJM, a rogerian Reader who is an occasional contributer to the Comments section, will be talking with the Progenitor roger.  Being from the generation that grew up in the late ’50s, her ‘take’ on the Doctrine should be quite interesting.
Also in the works, more from Ms. AKH (possibly another edition of her Advice Column, ‘…like I care…’) which has been generating a good amount of commentation.

So tell a friend to read this thing!
If any of you Readers run into any of (our) Slovian friends, tell them we really want to do an Interview with them. (And the Doctrine now has a translation function for each Post so no reason not to share it with the whole village, or family, or collective or whatever the hell social unit you guys are dividing your culture into).

YouTube Preview Image
Share
Filed Under: the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

CSR 101

January 8, 2010 By 2 Comments

( from the Roger);

     Attention…Company!   Shoulder… Arms!  By the right flank, by files left…March!  By Company into line…March!  Halt!  Order… Arms!  In place…Rest!   ( from Brig. Gen. Wm. Hardee’s North Carolina Drill Manual, pub. 1862)

     Ahh… I sometimes dearly miss the ritual of getting the attention of a group of surly re-enactors. ( Mostly Rogers with guns and edged weapons, for God’s sake.) We Rogers do so love a bit of pageantry now and then.

    The point to all that is to get your attention, of course. I had really planned on doing a quite straightforward post here, so please forgive the indulgence. I will now get right to it.

     By its very nature, the theme of this blog project needs to be repeated now and then for the sake of newcomers. Hopefully should eliminate some of that ” deer in the headlights” syndrome. ( or is that just me…) And hopefully, there will be a newcomer every so often… and if they’re browsing through all the old posts, it would be good if there were one of these ” primers” laying around. So… CSR 101.

    The main  ” voice” in this project is Clark. He is the originator of the theory. He started this blog, set up its format, checks the pertinent numbers, dots all the ‘i’s. I am Roger; I’ll do posts as the spirits command me, and until now, they have been little ” performance pieces”  from my point of view. This is the first time that I have addressed you, the inquisitive public, in a primary ” first-person” voice. As you will discern for yourselves, the forum is open to all, and there have been some very engaging conversations thus far.

    The main premise to the Wakefield Doctrine is that there are three fundamental personality types in the world. Clark and I discovered this years ago ( we are both older than dirt) through extensive discussion, debate, examination ( both the big ones and the little ones). And, being typically self- indulgent Americans, we eventually named the types after ourselves. Narcissism, plain and simple. Who, we asked the very heavens, was more important in the world than we? The Cosmos did not answer back, so… there it was. The theory of Clarks, Scotts, and Rogers. And, as a by-product, we also developed the idea that there are only three jobs in the world; scientist, salesman, and machine operator. And wouldn’t you know, the two classifications seem to interact in an almost prophetic fashion.

     A brief description of each;

     Clarks- Very cerebral by nature. Not necessarily a quiet personality, but very internally involved. Seemingly very conservative externally, there is likely a maelstrom of  abstract thinking going on in there. Scientists at the core. They think things up, invent things and ideas.

     Scotts- Very competitive and aggressive at heart. Very confident, socially outgoing in a particularly pack-oriented manner. Scotts are typically salesmen by nature. Their concerns are always highly self-motivated, and have a tremendous sense of forward momentum.

     Rogers- Very group- associated thinkers, very socially oriented.  Moderation, balance, and a sense of overall order are paramount. Machine operators at their core, they thrive in a detail- oriented environment.

     That’ s not all, of course. This is just re-stating the ground rules.  The intriguing truth of all this is that everything and everyone, ever will somehow fit into this framework. Look at yourself, your environment, anything in your universe, and it will work its way into this. Very seldom is any one person strictly defined by just one category; we are all maddeningly complicated combinations of all three. But with some poignantly uncomfortable self-analysis, you’ll find yourself gravitating more towards one type than the others. That is precisely when it starts to make sense. The stark clarity of it will give you a perspective that no one else around you has. You can not only recognize other people’s core natures, but you can predict with astounding accuracy how they will act in any situation.

     Here’s a quick example: I’m a Roger. I have done lots of different things in my life, but I identify myself primarily as a musician. I can play guitar better than most people I meet, and am quite comfortable, conversant, capable, and oriented towards the environment of professional musicianship. Pretty impressive, eh? Most people would say so. Does that make me better than them? Better than you? No, actually. But it does mean that I’m a damned good machine operator; meaning that I am skilled at a very particular thing in a very particular environment. That’s all. And that also means that there are many, many things that I haven’t a clue about, because I’ve spent so much time obsessing on the one thing. I can’t fix my toaster, but if you need to know what modal scale to use over a II-V-I chord change, I’m on it. Guy down the street makes a good living fixing toasters; I’ m just hungry because mine doesn’t work. Chew on that, Guitar Boy.

    Well, that’s probably enough CSR for one day. I’ve got to go have another crack at that toaster. Now, let’s see… put the fork in, then plug it in…

   ON THE NEXT POST: What’s the difference between the Wakefield Doctrine and the Boston Symphony Orchestra? Tune in next time on ” CSR 101″…

Share
Filed Under: clarkscottroger, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,

of clarks, scotts and rogers

August 4, 2009 By 1 Comment

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that behavior is a response to perception. Within individuals, these behaviors tend to repeat themselves over time, resulting in a characteristic type of behavior, personality.

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes to describe personality on the basis of perception rather than the behavior that results (from perception).

The three characteristic ways to perceive the world are identified as: clarks, scotts and rogers. It is a given that we all start our lives with the potential/’tendancy to perceive’ the world as any of and all of these three. At some point we become predominantly one (over the other two).

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

The goal of this Blog is to present the Wakefield Doctrine (aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) to the world in the hope that view of people and behavior represented by this idea will provide someone/somewhere  entertainment, education, enlightenment and the eventual modification of the world.

As will be immediately apparent, this blog is a collaborative effort and because of that (at least in part) the organization of the information is a bit, shall we say, casual? The posts are meant to be an introduction to the blog and the Wakefield Doctrine. The pages (listed above) are more specific to a topic, each of the three types of personality, an Overview and a couple of pages that are more of a blank canvas, intended to encourage contribution and participation of any and all readers.

So take a look. You might see a reflection in one of these pages. We welcome and invite comment, it will be appreciated as we continue to gather information and example, illustration and explanations, all with the intent of helping you, the reader, to see the clarks and the scotts and the rogers that are all around you.

And try to remember,as you read this blog, this is about tendencies, about being mostly one or another of the three types.

Share
Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , , ,
« Older Posts

© 2009-2012 the Wakefield Doctrine All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright