Confront Vested Interests: Cycle-2

The Spiral process operates, as usual, with 7 Stages over 2 Cycles that move needs from serving vested interests to serving the public interest.

Cycle-1 clarified that an institution rests on vested interests-Φ1, and focused on building awareness to generate a social accord: initially with solutions-Φ2, then via underlying issues-Φ3, and finally by grasping what is going on via a narrative-Φ4.

This topic considers Cycle-2, which builds the political will to confront vested interests: initially using revealing statistics-Φ5, then via debates-Φ6, and finally by compelling transparency-Φ7 to develop an accurate picture of the situation.

Stage-5: Present Shocking Statistics

The goal of the statistic is to activate the public and jolt opinion-formers and political players. The statistic must be selected to signal that something really is going wrong and requires fixing. It is presented as evidence even though the figure is rarely evidence in either the scientific or legal senses. As explained earlier, the data is normally "bad".

Publicizing that the Pentagon paid $10,000 for a toilet-seat lid suggests that defence procurement costs are out of control. Rectification is never easy because the system generating the institutional issue is being sustained by entrenched behaviours serving multiple vested interests.

Despite the vast number of parameters, no serious confrontation with vested interests can avoid the search for data items that reveal their iniquity.

Example: Profitability or Wages

Psychosocial Pressure: Any statistic can easily mislead or be dismissed, and so the main pressure in using figures is understanding them and appreciating the impact that will be generated. All lower level pressures will also apply: performance (to enable data scrutiny), certainty (to ensure validity), acceptability (to avoid disputes), well-being (to reduce feelings of distress). Higher level pressures... autonomy and selflessness do not appear to apply to the same degree.

Termination at Stage-5: Numbers and statistical analyses, if powerfully presented, can jolt a society and its government into awareness that can lead to changes that are desirable and felt necessary. Nothing more may be required.

Transition to Stage-6

However, statistics are tricky to manage, being the third item in «lies, damned lies and ....». So if numbers make the public dissatisfied while government statements or narratives from powerful vested interests backed invariably by alternative statistics seem to be reassuring, then there is likely to be stalemate.

To put statistics into perspective, to penetrate more deeply into the issue of concern, and potentially to break the stalemate, it is necessary for the numbers to be explained. Any explanation will be shaped by the perspective of a particular societal faction, and lead to public exposure. Within a dialogue or debating context, scrutiny and challenge is possible. This moves the institution to Stage-6.

Stage-6: Challenge Diverse Perspectives

There is never just one correct account of unavoidably complex situations in institutions because the numerous factional camps will tell a different story. The way forward is to challenge the positions of the major vested interests in relation to some disturbing statistic or problematic situation.

In most cases, powerful vested interests motivated by money or politics seek to operate silently in the shadows and do not take kindly to approaches from members of the public. The public must depend on the media and on government to learn about their views and plans and see them challenged.

Representatives of factional camps have their own personalities, backgrounds, biases, ideologies whether or not acknowledged. Challenges need to penetrate this in a conversational or debating context that allows for different perspectives to be counterpointed. Perspective-driven implications for the institutional issue need to be drawn out during interviews.

Psychosocial Pressure: While representing a particular interest group, staying «on message» is insufficient. Representatives must draw on their knowledge and experience to inform and benefit the wider community. To present a viewpoint that is willingly owned depends on an inner pressure for autonomy. All lower level pressures also apply to some degree, but selflessness does not.

Termination at Stage-6: The exposure generated by media interviews and panel discussions can reduce the tension infusing a societal institution. Even if explicit diversity does not generate a resolution, a good debate may even suggest new ways forward or perhaps confirm that all is being done that can be done. If the public becomes satisfied, then nothing more is required.

Transition to Stage-7

If public dissatisfaction continues or increases and there is no consensus on causes or the way forward, then it becomes necessary to get a grip on what is truly going on and what ought to be done. The requirement now is to finally overcome the secrecy and resistances put in place by powerful industries or professional bodies wanting protection, and government bodies seeking to hide incompetence, and avoid embarrassing revelations.

Radical openness cannot just happen: it requires a determination to compel transparency, either via court orders or via a government mandated inquiry. This occurs in Stage-7, the final Stage in bringing pressure to bear for change.

Stage-7: Demand Maximum Transparency

Putting the public interest first is impossible without the ability to compel transparency i.e. obtain documents without redaction, and get cooperation and evidence from key people under oath and via penetrating interrogation regardless of their status or social position.

Transparency demands impartiality, independence of government (even if set up by government), public hearings and full media reporting. Transparency is further increased if the members of the public who has suffered are involved. Relatively junior employees of relevant bodies may be given a hearing as well.

Psychosocial Pressure: The impartiality and transparency suggests that the main pressure here is selflessness. Compulsory transparency is also naturally under a pressure to perform, to be certain in its demands and interrogations, to be widely acceptable, to enable the well-being of society, to enable understanding of the institution in its context, and to be implemented in an autonomous way.

Termination

Compelling transparency reflects an official recognition that the public interest matters. So the final spontaneous movement of the Spiral is to re-enter L1 where it reaches the lower extreme of the ellipse.

There is no further or higher option in relation to bringing pressure to bear on institutions. So there is no transition and the framework for intensifying pressures for change terminates here.

Limitation

If something is seriously wrong, the public has a chance to get beneficial change if it is unified behind the way forward. This might involve new services, new policies, new regulations or additional expenditures—choices that would be otherwise unpopular, at least for some vested interests. Progress is easiest when the spiral is completed, and transparency has ensured that there is reasonable widespread confidence that matters are well-understood.

However, there can be no provision for the implementation of the Stage-7 findings and recommendations any more than at earlier Stages. Institutions are simply too large, diverse and complicated for that. Demands for needs to be met are potentially open-ended, while available resources are limited. Controversies amongst experts remain regardless of recommendations. Pressures affecting government and the venality of politicians do not vanish through publication of a report, while the power and greed of large firms are even less affected.

Example:  Dealing with Bushfires

Following almost every devastating bushfire in Australia in recent decades, and there have been many, there has been a public inquiry at the State or Federal level, including several Royal Commissions. The same recommendations are regularly made to rather little practical effect.

Even when recommendations are rapidly implemented, perhaps due to a public uproar or a government promise in advance, they may be quietly repealed at the first opportunity.

Example: Exposing the Banks

Over many years, the big banks in Australia received multiple complaints and sustained media criticism while generating massive profits. As the situation worsened, calls for a Royal Commission commenced. The Government rejected these demands until the public furore from multiple exposés led the banks themselves to push the government to act. The result was the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry established at end-2017. The interrogation of bank bosses in regard to their incompetence, dishonesty and callousness made for popular television viewing. It exposed to all the egregious misconduct driven by a culture pre-occupied with the pursuit of profit. The Government implemented some of the numerous recommendations, but repealed them as soon as an excuse appeared in the form of the COVID pandemic.

---

Having completed the Spiral, review the full picture.

Any significant change in an institution requires communal consent, and the various Stages/Types/Levels can be viewed as centres for consent and dissent.

• See the Tree of Consent.

Originally posted: 14-Nov-2022. Last updated: 30-Apr-2023