Conflict Managment
In the movie The Departed, Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio), is part of an undercover operation to infiltrate Frank Costello's (Jack Nicholson) gang. Hoping to get an invite to join the gang, Billy performs a series of crimes to get noticed. These crimes ended him in jail for several months, and he finally got noticed after getting into a brawl with some mafia members. Billy gave the off the appearance of a criminal that could hold his own. He just might be of use to the gang. However, Costello had his suspicions, and suspected that Billy might be a cop. While sitting at a bar, Costello approached Billy to gauge his interest in joining the gang and also test his suspicions. After some words were exchanged, Costello had one of his goons tap him down for any wires, and then him pin down and bash his already broken arm, all while asking if he was a cop. Satisfied with his work, Costello left and Billy's integration into the gang began.
As the leader of the gang, Costello wanted to make sure that the well-being of himself and the gang were being looked out for. If a rat entered the gang, it would bring everything down. In this context, decisions certainly have a life or death component to them. Considering this and the other factors that he needs to deal with, such as the mafia fighting for territory or someone from the inside trying to become the new boss, any sign of weakness could mean game over.
These are the beliefs that are part of the social dynamics in gang life, and the environment that gang members operate in. With a constant pressure to maintain authority, was the method Costello used to interrogate Billy the most effective? By having one of his goons perform the check and beat down, it showed Billy that Costello had control. Perhaps his reasoning was if he frightened Billy enough, he would truthfully answer the question of whether or not he was a cop. Argyris and Schon would describe this as a low inquiry and high advocacy approach. They also say this approach is alright for small and infrequent situations, however when every decision can mean life or death, they are all big ones.
Argyris and Schon suggest a more integrative approach, which means a high inquiry and high advocacy. Had Costello taken this approach, there would have been more talking, and he could still have performed a test to see if Billy was a cop. However, as mentioned earlier, this might appear as weak, so he couldn't afford to take the approach. The costs associated with taking an integrative approach leave few other paths open, and all of which self defeating behaviors become an issue.
Costello believes that Billy will make a good fit for the gang, but he doesn't display this in actuality. By putting on a facade of distrust and wielding his power, he is cutting himself off to the possibility of being informed or helped by other members in the gang. If they know that Costello has his beliefs and is forced to act within the framework of a gangster, why would they give any further input? It reinforces the social norms of a gang and eventually leads to the destruction of the gang itself.
As someone looking for gang employment, Billy wanted to appear as appealing as possible. He had to understand the informal roles and norms of the gang life, otherwise he wouldn't seem like a good fit. During the interrogation, he basically let Costello have his way, and as long as he maintained his cover, there would be no way to figure out he was actually a cop. In Argyris and Schon's terms, they would describe this as a low inquiry and low advocacy approach. The decision to take this passive approach left the decision work up to Costello, all in the hope of Bill's previous signalling was enough to arrive to the desired result.
In this situation, both Costello and Billy believe they have achieved their goals by leveraging what they perceived to be the rules of their game. These perceptions along with the roles the believed they played, influenced the approaches the used for communication and interacting between each other and amongst other people in the gang as well. Given the danger of the situation for both people, it would be difficult for either to act differently.
As the leader of the gang, Costello wanted to make sure that the well-being of himself and the gang were being looked out for. If a rat entered the gang, it would bring everything down. In this context, decisions certainly have a life or death component to them. Considering this and the other factors that he needs to deal with, such as the mafia fighting for territory or someone from the inside trying to become the new boss, any sign of weakness could mean game over.
These are the beliefs that are part of the social dynamics in gang life, and the environment that gang members operate in. With a constant pressure to maintain authority, was the method Costello used to interrogate Billy the most effective? By having one of his goons perform the check and beat down, it showed Billy that Costello had control. Perhaps his reasoning was if he frightened Billy enough, he would truthfully answer the question of whether or not he was a cop. Argyris and Schon would describe this as a low inquiry and high advocacy approach. They also say this approach is alright for small and infrequent situations, however when every decision can mean life or death, they are all big ones.
Argyris and Schon suggest a more integrative approach, which means a high inquiry and high advocacy. Had Costello taken this approach, there would have been more talking, and he could still have performed a test to see if Billy was a cop. However, as mentioned earlier, this might appear as weak, so he couldn't afford to take the approach. The costs associated with taking an integrative approach leave few other paths open, and all of which self defeating behaviors become an issue.
Costello believes that Billy will make a good fit for the gang, but he doesn't display this in actuality. By putting on a facade of distrust and wielding his power, he is cutting himself off to the possibility of being informed or helped by other members in the gang. If they know that Costello has his beliefs and is forced to act within the framework of a gangster, why would they give any further input? It reinforces the social norms of a gang and eventually leads to the destruction of the gang itself.
As someone looking for gang employment, Billy wanted to appear as appealing as possible. He had to understand the informal roles and norms of the gang life, otherwise he wouldn't seem like a good fit. During the interrogation, he basically let Costello have his way, and as long as he maintained his cover, there would be no way to figure out he was actually a cop. In Argyris and Schon's terms, they would describe this as a low inquiry and low advocacy approach. The decision to take this passive approach left the decision work up to Costello, all in the hope of Bill's previous signalling was enough to arrive to the desired result.
In this situation, both Costello and Billy believe they have achieved their goals by leveraging what they perceived to be the rules of their game. These perceptions along with the roles the believed they played, influenced the approaches the used for communication and interacting between each other and amongst other people in the gang as well. Given the danger of the situation for both people, it would be difficult for either to act differently.
I haven't seen this movie but I have watched Donnie Brasco, which is a real life story in the same vein. Conflict within a gang (or among mobsters) is probably not about management style. In some older movies about the mafia, notably The Godfather, the conflict ends up in the deaths of people, including family members. A betrayal is absolute. I don't believe Argyris and Schon meant for their approach to apply in such extreme situations. If you did see the Godfather then you might consider Michael's relationship with Tom Hagen to be in the Argyris and Schon mold. (Tom was not a wartime consigliere, but he remained loyal to the Corleone family.) But much of the rest was completely over the top and, i believe, not useful to use for lessons on how conflict might be avoided.
ReplyDeleteDonnie Brasco sounds like a movie I'd be interested in. I do enjoy those kinds of movies. I agree that people in these kinds of situations really couldn't apply the lessons Argyris an Schon come up with. However, I do find that since they don't have much choice but to behave in a manner that prevents high levels of inquiry and advocacy, they are good examples of the outcomes that could come from such behavior. Also, if one considers what would happen if they took Argyris an Schon's approach, it could help highlight some counter examples of management style.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is very difficult to apply some of the more sterile, realistic management theories to situations like a gang initiation with undercover cops, but you have done a good job doing so. I think the key concept here is signaling. Billy is doing his best to give off the signal that he is just a normal guy looking for mafia work, while Costello is trying very hard to detect a signal that Billy is an undercover cop. Because they are each interested in opposite signals, this type of "interview" is inefficient and leads both sides to unnecessary costs. In Billy's case, he leaves with a broken arm, and Costello has to assume risk without having sufficiently reduced it. With the implicit threat that being revealed as a cop means he will be killed, Billy is easily willing to take a broken arm to keep his secret, thus Costello's action helps no one.
ReplyDelete