by Charles Jones
You have often heard the phrase "on-the-level" used as a substitute for honesty. The personal quality of being on-the-level is closely related to one's integrity. Being on-the-level is probably derived from many centuries of using scales and weights to conduct trade.
With or without the use of scales to conduct transactions, a merchant is either on-the-level or off-the-level. Once a buyer decides a merchant is off-the-level, future transactions with that merchant are not likely to occur. Likewise, if the buyer believes that the merchant is always on-the-level, the use of the scales became a formality rather than a necessity.
Just as doctors practice their bedside manner, politicians practice being sincere. Politicians become experts at "looking good like a candidate should." Many news media personalities are also paid big salaries because they look good and appear to be sincere, conveying a sense of integrity that captures a bigger audience than that of the competition.
Politicians and news media people have an advantage over doctors since they are just a little more detached from the focus or personal context of the individual citizen than are doctors from their patients. They also do not have to maintain detailed records, nor is it likely that anyone will file a malpractice suit against them, although they do worry a little about libel suits.
Likewise, people in the entertainment industry are largely unaccountable simply because they admit to being actors. They have instant emotional capital among their fans, so they can influence a large number of people.
Once again, technology plays a significant role in enabling actors to attain such influence. Properly used, that influence can be positive. When used simply to support a narrow or polarized special interest agenda, an actor's influence can be problematic. Like politicians and news media people, popular entertainers are difficult to hold accountable, especially in the absence of a critical framework such as Technidigm-2000.
In contrast to doctors, politicians, entertainers, and news media personalities, industrial plant managers are likely to be held strictly accountable. In particular, nuclear plant managers can not afford to just look good, at least not for very long. They must operate their nuclear plants under the scrutiny of independent inspectors (I used to be one of them) who get paid to make long lists of discrepancies. If a nuclear plant manager or worker is not on-the-level, it is likely that they will be identified as contributing to the root causes of problems or potential problems. In one instance, a nuclear department manager merely suggested that our inspection team should ease up a bit on the inspection. He was unemployed before the day was out. He was held accountable for his poor approach to nuclear power plant safety. There are many such stories that could be told about the strict standards and accountability in the nuclear industry, but off-the-level people are found much more frequently in areas of context more familiar to the reader. Indeed, most of you could write your own book on people who are not on-the-level and not inclined to do the right thing (objectives) for the right reasons (principles).
No Point Being Off-the-Level
You do not often hear the phrase "off-the-level," but you immediately recognize that this refers to dishonesty. Being "on"-the-level is important because there is no point in trying to conduct business or solve problems in the midst of dishonesty. Thus, Technidigm-2000 stresses personal integrity, making it a central litmus test for those who want to participate in Technidigm-2000. How would you like to have dishonest people operating a nuclear power plant in your community? Fortunately, the nuclear industry has no tolerance at all for dishonest people. The same is true for the military. The tough part is identifying the individuals who should be removed.
The need for honesty and integrity in human relations was much more evident a couple of hundred years ago when people depended on each other more than they depended on government. Being on-the-level was a litmus test for most situations, a test that quickly removed a lot of the confusion surrounding most problems. People were on-the-level, and their handshake was enough to seal a deal. A person's handshake was as important as a signature on a contract is today.
Some would say that personal integrity was at one time more important than a signature. The fact is that integrity is just as important today as it ever was -- we have simply failed to recognize its importance and have failed to require it in a consistent manner.
Charles R Jones is the author of "On the Level:Common Sense, Technically Speaking". this book can be found on his web site Technidigm 2000 Technidigm 2000 are the 12 elements of his work
Comments