Most of my professional life has been learning and implementing psychological communications towards/with students who are the most deviant from the 'norm' and athletes who are working toward or are at elite status. I learned quickly that my beliefs meant nothing if they did not embrace in my efforts the culture and world view of the people in question. What we believe we are implementing and what is being implemented are often poles apart. What clarifies the dilemma are two main factors;

1. The open regard for the receivers belief system even if it is completely at odds with our beliefs. This acceptance of anther's belief system is difficult to achieve and it requires that one believe that all actions have a positive intent regardless of how bizarre or absurd. What 'we' think of as absurd or irrational may to another be both logical and rational. A quick example is the early characterization of Kamikaze pilots in the Pacific as irrational and not respecting life. To the Japanese, they were heroes, the 'Divine Wind' of retribution. Once we realized what we were up against, supported by the mounting deaths of US Marines and the willingness of the Japanese soldier to fight 'to the death' we increased the use of brute force as a continuing strategy. We had leveled the cities in Germany which had a similar effect. It was the final brute application of force that ended this strife.

2. The ability to be flexible in observing results of our communications. You must ask the question, Am I observing a result which matches my supposition? The meaning of the message is in the response not the message! For those who remember that during the micro management of the Viet Nam war, we often halted bombing so that the enemy would have time to 'consider' and modify their belief. What the Viets were doing, however, was to quickly rebuild or reposition there assets. They cared not for Sec. Macnamara's belief, using the time to implement a well thought out strategy. Only when Nixon ordered 'Operation Linebacker' which hammered the former off limits targets did we get to the peace table in Paris. Brute force got the war to end and cut our losses. Surgical operations and 'psy-ops' did not. In both the former and the latter 'psy-ops' was based on faulty assumptions, using cultural biases and ignorance to manipulate another culture. It's like using the wrong size wrench to turn a bolt.

So what is the answer? Continue with psy-ops...yes, provided we are willing to accept the answers we are getting and then we modify the psy-ops. Any effective marketing manager knows that when a sales campaign is not working you best find out if 'it' is based on faulty premise or the premise is OK but the implementation or objective is ineffective. Remember the customer is ALWAYS right whether he/she is a student, terrorist or Iraqi General. The answer is always in the objective behavior of those we are aiming at and not the belief of the 'aimer'. It may be that brute force will be the final answer and we must be willing to accept even that. It is one thing we can all agree that the Iraq leadership understands.

Return to Previous Page           Return to Home Page