Fogtiming

Today, I want to introduce a new concept: fogtiming, also know as muddletiming, procrasticuscation, or obfuscitactics. All of course neologisms ;-)

Let me start with a little story, a fictive discussion scenario:

John: "Let's be realistic about this. The daily routine of using that intricate apparatus is overwhelmingly complex. You start with a detailed inspection of circular rubber components and mechanical devices, ensuring every part is functional. Then, there's the protective gear, hydration packs, luminous devices, and gathering work materials. Mounting involves managing numerous gears and levers, navigating a pre-planned, obstacle-filled path. Throughout the journey, constant vigilance is required, adjusting settings and signaling intentions. Upon arrival, there's the process of stopping, securing the device, and removing all protective gear. Contrast this with the simplicity of just stepping into a straightforward, protected environment and moving along a clear path."

Moderator: "John, your point about complexity is noted, but let's keep the discussion focused."

John: "But you see, it's not just about complexity. There are also safety concerns. Navigating through traffic, uneven roads, and dealing with regulatory signals—it all adds up. In a straightforward, protected environment, you're secure, it's simple, and you avoid all these complications. We need more studies to fully understand these issues before making any changes. Why rush into something so convoluted when we have a tried-and-true method?"

Emily: "John, you're filibustering. The benefits of alternative transportation are clear. Simplifying the narrative to focus on the core issues—health, environmental impact, and urban congestion—shows that the complexity you describe is exaggerated. We can streamline the process and make it more accessible."

John: "But let's not forget the broader implications. What about the economic impact of such a shift? The infrastructure changes, the potential job losses in traditional industries, the cost to taxpayers for implementing these new systems. And then there's the individual level: the increased time it takes for such a commute, the physical strain on those who aren't fit, the unpredictable weather conditions. Each of these points warrants detailed consideration."

Moderator: "John, we need to ensure we are addressing the key points without getting lost in the minutiae."

John: "Exactly. And that's why I'm saying we can't overlook these details. It's too significant a change to rush into without exhaustive analysis and public consultation. We need to form a committee to study all these aspects thoroughly, conduct pilot programs, and gather comprehensive data before making any commitments."

Emily: "John, it's clear you're trying to delay progress by overcomplicating the discussion and suggesting unnecessary steps. Using Occam’s Razor, we see the simplest solution: encouraging alternative transportation methods that offer clear benefits. The perceived complexity can be managed and shouldn't deter us from making positive changes."

Moderator: "Let's move forward with constructive solutions and address both perspectives without delaying progress. We need to find a balanced approach that considers valid concerns but also embraces necessary changes for the greater good."

John: "But if we rush this, we risk unforeseen consequences. We can't afford to overlook the details."

Moderator: "We have limited time for this discussion. Emily, you were saying about the benefits of—"

Emily: "The benefits are numerous, but if we keep getting bogged down by—"

John: "And what about the hidden costs? Are we really prepared for the economic upheaval?"

Got what the debate was about? And what is it we see here? Does it sound familiar? It’s used in politics a lot, but also in lobbying by companies, and at the workplace when Team A wants something Team B does not want or understand - maybe because their goals are contradictory...

It describes a deliberate tactic used to delay progress by engaging in extended discussions and introducing layers of complexity or confusion to obscure the main issues.

Overly complicating descriptions and getting into endless debate about it, can be a powerful tactic for obstructing progress. When simple processes are made to appear complex, and need to be discussed till the last detail, it creates confusion and delays decision-making and implementation of solutions. This confusion can intimidate individuals, making them feel they lack the expertise to engage, reducing public involvement and support. This tactic shifts focus away from the core problem, causing people to miss the bigger picture. It creates a false sense of expertise, positioning obstructers as necessary experts, thus controlling the narrative. Complex descriptions also justify the need for further study, delaying action. Misleading stakeholders by amplifying perceived risks and costs can lead to hesitation or resistance to change. Such complexity obscures accountability, diffusing responsibility and making it harder to hold anyone accountable for inaction. It exploits cognitive overload, overwhelming people with information, leading to decision fatigue and a preference for the status quo.

For instance, in "Merchants of Doubt," the tobacco industry used intricate scientific arguments to create doubt about smoking's harms, delaying regulation. This strategy mirrors filibustering tactics used in meetings. By talking excessively and introducing tangential topics, they delay decisions and exhaust participants.

Here’s where Occam’s Razor - discussed recently -, the principle that the simplest solution is often the correct one, can be applied. Use Occam’s Razor to strip away unnecessary details and focus on core issues, making it easier for everyone to understand and engage with the issue. Clarify complex arguments by identifying their fundamental points, revealing underlying simplicity. Streamline decision-making in meetings by focusing on the simplest, most effective solutions and discouraging excessive talking or tangential topics. We need to educate stakeholders to apply Occam’s Razor in their thinking, empowering them to identify and disregard unnecessarily complicated arguments. Promote transparency in data and decision-making processes by simplifying the presentation of information, making it harder for obstructers to hide behind complexity.

By consistently applying Occam’s Razor, you can counteract tactics designed to create unnecessary complexity and filibustering, advancing progress and promoting effective, meaningful change. But first, you must recognise it is being used!