.

Is hypothesis two true?   Here are two primary complementary modes of inquiry we can use for this question:

      Inquiry Mode One: "The relative effectiveness under pressure of people with similar roles and responsibilities"

            and

      Inquiry Mode Two: "Changes over time in one's total effectiveness."

 

Define "effectiveness" as "how well one works under pressure, alone and with others." Use this base definition as a 

beginning point in each situation considered.   In the above terms, consider yourself, the people you know well,

and those you are aware of,  through your home, community, school, business, government, sports, law, arts, travel... 

Consider exceptions and special cases. ( Does hypothesis two apply to you as you change over the years?  Might it

be useful to you in general?  For specific purposes? )

Two corresponding standard research methods have yielded highly significant results in early studies of 1) many groups and 2) many individual subjects.  Using separate sets of observers, and experimental research controls, they enable macroscopic statistical analysis of different proposed criteria for human effectiveness, namely:

Inquiry Mode One: Spearman Rank Correlations ranging from values of -1.0 to +1.0 for the degree of agreement between

independent  rankings of a group of individuals based on "a proposed criterion" and perceived actual "effectiveness", and

Inquiry Mode Two: Binomial Coincidence Correlation, from 0.0 to 1.0, with the Null Hypothesis = 0.5 that a person's behaviors based on "a proposed criterion" and independently on "effectiveness" increase, or decrease, together over time ( for any reason, as in the pure chance that either 2 heads, or 2 tails, will result from one toss of two coins )

.

    - "To Select A Leader", TECHNOLOGY REVIEW - MIT, 5 / 70, and SCIENCE TODAY - Bombay, India 1 / '71

      - "Maturity as A Goal: A Design for Fundamental Research", EDUCATIONAL HORIZONS, Winter '69-'70

 

Informally, you may find the following analogy of interest as it stands, and also with the two inquiry modes:

Force with Control works in sports  /  Honesty with Consideration works in life.
The COMBINATION determines the batting average / ... affects the season's performance.

 

    No one bats 1000.  Everyone plays!            Raise the batting average.  Raise the team standing.   

Whether used informally or for rigorous research, the two complementary inquiry modes help to organize

experience from history and literature, and from our shared intuition and direct observation. They invite the study

of practical articulations for "maturity" and "effectiveness".   They can serve us, respectively, as a framework

for our reflection and action on 1) our readiness for responsibility and leadership, and 2) our personal maturity.

 

– h2 Practices

– h2 Menu –

h2 Interplay –