Permission VS. Forgiveness

There is the adage that “it is better to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission.” This ethical controversial action is meant to be used in situations where swift action is better than asking for approval where emergencies can be made more harmful than immediate bold action. Doctors in emergency rooms are an example where time is of the essence.

It is also used in business, management, and technology to promote innovation when a decision is required to move through stagnant permission. This kind of decision-making has a very negative downside where trust is broken, and it communicates a disrespect for authority.

The origin of this decision-making model has been subject to much speculation. Most historians credit this adage to Rear Admiral Grace Hopper who applied this decision-making style as one of the earliest experts seeking to improve the use of computer technology. It is always done by someone who is willing to take responsibility when his or her action doesn’t lead to a desired outcome. It is not used when there is a clear way to achieve objectives, so it is not done when there is significant damage to others in carrying out the decision.

If you want to witness this kind of decision-making when it is done watch the TV series, The Pitt, which is the show that depicts emergency action in a Pittsburgh Hospital Emergency Room over a 15 hour shift. It is a gripping tale of the snap decisions that doctors must make. it reminded me of my time at Duke Medical Center where people didn’t go there for a tonsillectomy as it was the go-to place for high-risk procedures in the South. Outcomes of treatment were necessary in the context of a life and death environment. There was no time to do things as decisions were made sometimes in the matter of minutes. Time is one of the factors that is critical in permission/forgiveness decisions.

We have been living with this decision-making model for some time as we witness first-hand the negative aspects of it. It has not been in an Emergency Room but in the office of President Donald Trump.

Trump thrives on chaos for he knows that if he operates his government filled with chaos when it is does not have to be that way, he can trample any authority that gets in his way.

It is chaos that is the context for him to forget about any permission and forgiveness that his character doesn’t permit. He never takes responsibility.  I recently wrote a blog which was a cry for action for some entity to put Trump in his place. Think about it! He has made terrible decisions to empower Ice, put his name on the East Wing after it has been destroyed, the Kennedy Center’s change of leadership now named after him, and his DEI policies. He walks over all authorities as he has hired a Cabinet that will never say “No!”

FINALLY, THE SUPREME COURT said, “No, to his tariff program!” He doesn’t know what to do except to blame others. All his bankruptcies have that characteristic as well. They failed because he thought he was the smartest person in the room.

You can only do what Trump has done to create chaos as a precursor of this permission/forgiveness model. It brings uncertainly to corporations and small businesses when you don’t know what he is going to do next. We know in family therapy that uncertainty and chaos create dysfunction throughout the family.  Chaos is hard to manage. I believe that Joe Biden was elected for the people could only stand so much uncertainly and chaos.

During his 2004 bankruptcy of one of his casinos he said, “I don’t think that it is a failure. I think that it is a success.” He dismissed the people who were left out of his decisions including lenders, bond holders, and small contractors. High risk for everyone but him. He proclaimed that the bankruptcies were corporate reconstructing. He refused to say the word bankruptcy or take responsibility for his actions. The responsibility after his bankrupcy was the burden of those blue collar workers on the job. Many of their companies had to shut down as Trump did not pay them.

His words echoed the same as Leona Helmsley, another New York hotel tycoon, who said, “We don’t pay taxes. The little people do.”

There is a paradox here. The company that sued Trump was Learning Resources. They specialize in toys that help children to learn as well as improve their social emotional lives.

It   has 500 workers and has been in the same family for four generations. Its revenue is over $250 million. Rick Woldenberg is the CEO. Obviously, it Is a company that is doing much good for society. It is small compared to most companies and is a family-owned business.

Production for this company largely occurred in Asia with most of the products coming from China. Its tariff costs were $2.5 million. After Trump’s tariffs went into effect the cost of their tariffs were $20-30 million. The family business was committed to helping children to learn. But Trump’s tariffs never considered the contributions a company was doing to improve the life of children. One size fit all. So, this small company sued Trump. The result was the Supreme Court’s recent decision to forbid Trump to continue to use his illegal tariffs.

Who said that the story of David and Goliath isn’t happening today? It is. No sling shot, but a toy to assist a child in learning took Trump down. Watch out for the little people!