Evolution in the Workplace - Term Paper Example

?Evolution in the Workplace Everyone wants to fit in at some point in their lives. Children are born hugging their parents and clinging onto a “blanky” or something that signifies security. Without this sense of security, belonging is not a reality. From birth, to death, we are hardwired to modify who we are in order to fit into a race, culture, and society. Even when we are grown, and ready for the workplace, our innate sense of instincts starts to take over and we become, what it is we are asked to become. We are, by nature, pleasers for success. Ever since the beginning of time, we were created for survival. Whether this survival is by natural selection, or by clinging onto Jesus’ teachings, we were still created to rise to the top. But not everyone rises to the top in the same way. Not only do we not rise in the same way, we are not always chosen for the role we want in life. Our behavior seems to dictate who we will hang out with at lunch time during our high school years. We are guided by our behavior which orders us to determine how we will communicate with our professors in order to receive a passing grade in college. Our children learn to sweat talk us with “good” behavior when they want to go to a party or want us to change our minds about something already predetermined. Our behavior runs the show. The question isn’t whether we are good at convincing one another or choosing the right group of friends to associate ourselves with. The question is how hardwired is human behavior? (Nicholson, 1998, p. 135) Is it in our genes? Is it in our blood? Did God make us a certain way? Did evolution split us in a particular direction? So many questions with such a diverse amount of answers leads some to believe that it is through natural selection that we are able to stand on our own two feet and be successful in life, and in our workplace. But others, still, believe that from day one, we were made to be a certain way. This could be through creation or evolution. Evolution is not the belief that there is no intelligent design. It is the belief that things change and adapt from its particular origin. The origin can be different for each species and not even Charles Darwin claimed to know what the origin was. (Wright, 1994, pp. 1-10) He only claims that things evolve from one point to another. Evolution however, is not just one step and the theory is not as narrow as it may seem. The theory includes six different components which create the theory of evolution in its entirety. The six components are evolution, gradualism, speciation, common ancestry, natural selection, and nonselective mechanism of evolutionary change. (Coyne, 2009, p. 3) Each of these parts means something important and are directly applied to determining which person is best fit for the job at hand. Evolution itself means that a particular species undergoes genetic change over time. Is this something that occurs in the workplace? Yes! Overtime, people learn how to please their “boss” or they are not rehired. For the manager, they learn to look for traits that is going to help grow their business, not shrink it. This is where the idea of modern Darwinism comes in. The new fields of science or psychology do not just come about. They evolve, and with its evolution come the ability to choose in a more purposeful way. Choosing who will work for you is so important because you do not want to be stuck with the thought that you will need to “fire” that person. Gradualism is the idea that it takes many years to produce the product of evolution. (Coyne, 2009, p. 4) In the workplace this means two things. The manager or the boss needs to have several bad apples before realizing what he really wants, and, improvement in the workforce comes over time. Competition adds to the search for the new and better improved resources that will help a company grow, and not extinguish itself. Part of this gradualism is allowing time for change. If the boss does not allow time for change, he or she will either not see change, or the change will happen so fast, they will not notice it. Some changes occur quickly and others take more time. Once a species or a people group becomes well-adapted, the evolution will slow down. (Coyne, 2009, p. 4) The search for the best will become less intense. Speciation and common ancestry seem to share the same bed. We all have something in common. Just like in the workplace, we want to be the best that we can. This idea dates back to the Stone Age and hunter and gatherers. You can take the person out of the Stone Age but you can’t take the Stone Age out of the person. Speciation suggests that we all share some fundamental traits. Some of these traits are the biochemical pathways that we use to produce energy, and our DNA. This means that we all will date back, at some point, to a common ancestry. (Coyne, 2009, p. 7) Saying that we have a common ancestry is saying that someone way way way back in the day, shared a trait that they passed on from generation to generation until it eventually got to us. This is so visible in today’s day and age. At work, people posses certain talents. Not everyone does the same job. The manager chooses those who are able to exhibit a particular trait, to work a specialized job. Someone who is quick with numbers may work the registry faster than someone who can speak another language. The ability to acquire that second, third or fourth language may also be a trait that is passed on through the genes. These people may work at the front desk. People are affected by their emotions and therefore have a particular way of reacting to feedback. As a manager, it is difficult to give feedback because it is proven that employees tend to hang on to the negative feedback more strongly than if they were to receive positive feedback. This is obvious and consequently, choosing people with certain genetic traits is essential. A person who is introverted is more likely to be affected by negative feedback than a person who is extraverted. Nature, as opposed to nurture, helps determine what kind of personality someone will have and this “nature” phenomenon is passed down by a common ancestor. Nurture is the “splitting” or “speciation” component of evolution that brings to light the ability to adapt to a certain environment. A person knows that if a job requires a certain trait they may not posses; they can choose to learn how to fulfill the role, or ignore the job offer all together. How one is raised is directly connected to how one will perform under supervision, or as a boss. This is where being able to survive surfaces. Being able to survive is important. The idea of natural selection is the most intellectual achievement thought up by Darwin and people before him. Alfred Wallace also contemplated this great phenomenon which made this though not unique to only Darwin. Darwin however gets more notice for the idea because in his famous book The origin, he has a very detailed description of his proposition. His proposition gave evidence for natural selection and it also explored the consequences set forth. The fact that natural selection is unsettling is not a surprise. It proposes that the difference in species and hardwiring allows some to survive or to die off or become extinct. This becomes an issue of strength. A person could have the same traits and qualities, but if they are not strong enough, they will be eliminated from the race. This leads to the “good” genes in a person. Dating all the way back to the Stone Age hunter and gatherers, it is clear that those who were not strong enough in the wilderness, or in the cave, produced less offspring and eventually got rid of itself. Natural selection is a primer in the workplace. All living things are designed by specific combinations of different genes. The genes are made up of the mother and also the father. Not only are the father and mother involved in the making of the genes of a child and eventually a full grown person, but the ancestors play a major role in what the child will become in the future. Species that cannot survive their surroundings are set aside by the theory of environmental selection. Sexual selection takes affect when a species no longer becomes attracted to their same kind. Evolutionary psychologists go on to suggest that the theory of natural selection explains the working of the human brain. If evolution was able to shape the body of a person, animal, or insect, it would also be able to shape the mind of the human. The success of the homosapian is not a mistake. The human brain is enlarged with the purpose of survival. Much of the way the brain is already programmed was already in place and part of the inheritance of pre-human ancestors. Thanks to natural selection, other “circuits” or ways of doing things developed that made being human more of a competition than a simple past time. This competition was survival. Technology has been a huge catalyst for the stressful completion which exists in the life of a human. But even back in the hunter-gatherer times, the cavemen learned to better themselves as they were introduced to new tools and new ways of life. This new found knowledge allowed people to accumulate wealth and live in larger numbers and greater concentrations. Fast and short steps of the agricultural revolution have brought us to modern civilization, and in essence, the need to be successful in order to survive. Nonselective mechanisms can also bring about evolutionary change, not just the last five components mentioned above. The randomization of genes per family can cause changes over time. This in itself has nothing to do with adaptation. This does not affect the gene pool as much. However, only natural selection can leave such a huge impact on the human and its ancestors. Due to the time frame of the Diaspora of human beings around the world over 50,000 years ago, it is impossible for there to be an accurate mutation. The environment has not posed such a threat that evolution must actually continue in order to be a means of survival. Ten thousand years is not enough time to warrant a change in the evolutionary process. This is why evolution is not a continued process. Imagine now what will happen when a company announces that they are going to layoff or fire some of the workers they have had for many years. One must take into consideration that the laying off is not a cause of production, but it is an affect. The first thought that goes through someone’s mind is “who will be let go?” Once that question begins to circulate the cubicles, people begin acting in a manner that requires them to fight for survival. They may have family members at home depending on their paychecks and this is why they may need to work a bit harder. This is where skill comes in. People with a particular skill, that benefits the company, will stay and those who resemble little to no skill will be the ones to be let go. The idea of being hardwired to act desperately in a desperate situation causes managers to start asking questions regarding what they really want. This line of questioning usually yields people thinking “outside the box”. Either way, it’s risky business. People seem to be content with the status quo and therefore, unless threatened by their environment or workplace, become complacent and even dissatisfied. When people think “outside the box”, you as a manager begin to require them to be creative and innovative in the way they perform. No one wants someone who is psychedelic or robotic. Allowing employees to think for themselves can be risky business and must be handled with care. Risk taking is a big deal in the business world and managers need to know how to be effective. If they want people to take risks, then they need to present the situation in a logical sequence. Instead of just laying people off, they need to explore what would make them keep their employees. It is all about how the situation is viewed and then handled. If they approach the issue in a manner that causes their employees to take risks, then they have gained their trust and have created self-thinkers. Sayings things like “the competition is going to destroy us with this new product” allows employees to start thinking up ways to combat the competition. They can either create a product that tops the one in competition or bring down the price of what is being threatened. It really is all about approach. This will call for risk-taking behaviors which may later lead to the appropriate outcome, natural selection. Overconfidence is part of our genetic make-up. Since the Stone Age, the human species has always had a sense of who is better and who is worse in the family. They began to purposefully put themselves in groups where they would feel that they belonged and were of use. As a manager, asking whether over optimism is something that could be a problem is very important. Being realistic with your expectations is key to being a good boss, and to having a functioning company. In order to make sense of this very complex universe, humans developed a way to sort and classify information. This dates way back to the bible times. Even nonliterate tribes had a way of organizing their food, things and people. Even today, tribes that cannot read or write, have taxonomic knowledge of their environment in terms of animal habits and plant life. The hunter-gathers knew that in order to prosper, they had to be experts in certain fields. They had to be able to differentiate the trustworthy from the untrustworthy. This created the ability to stereotype people, even way back when. People naturally sort others into ‘in” groups and “out” groups. Subconsciously, so do managers. A manager can look at a first time employee and know, from the start whether they will be in or out. They know who will be “winners” or “losers”, and this is all tied into success at the workplace. From the beginning, gossip controlled the outcome of a people group. Without gossip, certain cultural and ethnic groups would not be in existence today. The idea of passing on information from one person to another and then finding out later that it may or may not be true, is what occurs at work. And whatever gets to the boss first is what he uses to determine the success of the business. If information is passed about a particular person, this information is digested and then evaluated. The evaluation may come as a shock; it can be dismissal or a promotion. But it’s not all negative. People also seem to be programmed to be friendly as well. From sharing food, to giving up some free time to volunteer, we can see that being spiteful is not our only hardwired nature. We are capable of loving and building positive relationships that should last a lifetime. In each of our hearts, we have a built in sensory stimulator which tells us when we hurt or feel hurt. This is good news for managers because being able to empathize and be friendly is generally considered a bonus in the workplace. Having these characteristics makes you more likeable which creates more peace and harmony. When a manager loves his employees, the employees are more likely to respond well, therefore creating and producing more for the company. It is important to contemplate the meaning of being hardwired to respond a certain way. Is this reaction an innate response to a problem or an issue or is it something that can be changed through nature and nurture? If people are hardwired to use their emotions when information is relayed to them, then it is important for managers to understand that people hear bad news louder than good news. Be aware of who is in charge of relaying information to employees that will soon affect their future. If people seek hierarchy in their work place, managers should be aware that the idea of climbing the ladder of success will be continuous even if an attempt to remove it is there. When people are overconfident, managers should analyze whether the employee understands the task at hand. This helps differentiate fact from fiction or a dream from reality. When employees are engaging in gossip because it is part of their make-up, managers should realize that sometimes the gossip can be helpful and instead of trying to stop it, plug into it and keep it positive. In order to really consider the idea of modern Darwinism and whether we are hardwired to perform a certain way, we need to go back in our minds and consider who we are today. Are we that person who always tries to reach the top of the ladder of success? Do we push people down by using gossip and hurtful actions? Are we able to distinguish between what we are capable of doing and what we really want to do just for a promotion? Do we push ourselves to the limit and then later crash? These are all questions that have been explained previously and just needs to be critically applied in our everyday lives. As children, we are born with an innate sense of belonging; most are in the “in” crowd from birth. As we grow and mature, that crowd becomes bigger and bigger and is changed by its environment, mutating, and evolving into something that was not expected. We start to create niches, and start to hide our faces. We are always longing for that feeling of belonging somewhere. Our blanky, or security mechanism is what saves us. In the work place, we cling to our talents, our knowledge, and our abilities which are passed down through our genes in order to create that security blanket; that feeling of being “in”. And if we are not “in”, we find a way to be in whether it is stepping on someone, replacing someone, gossiping about someone or overpowering someone. The thing that most separated us, making us unique in our being, becomes a melting pot for the sole purpose of pleasing others. We are, by nature, a person who pleases in order to be successful and survive. Works Cited Coyne, J. (2009). Chapter 1: What is Evolution. New York: Penguin. Nicholson, N. (1998, 4). How Hardwired is Human Behavior. Harvard Business Review , pp. 134-137. Wright, R. (1994). The Moral Animal: Why we are the way we are, the new Science of Evolutaty phsycology. New York: Vintage Books. Read More