It really was a bold move and I doubt that any successful
company in a Capitalist country would even have considered
making such a move. Perhaps it is typical of the sudden
dramatic shifts that often happen in Eretz Yisroel. Of
course, it doesn't really make any difference. When you have
a monopoly, you can paint your buses with red and white
stripes, or solid green, and people will still travel on
them.
The previous change that the Egged Bus Cooperative had made
was from red stripes on white background to purple stripes on
white background and this is more typical of what one would
expect. Purple is a softer color than red. Furthermore, they
kept the stripe design but modified the stark straight red
stripe to a more graceful, curving purple one. Purple is not
a completely different color either: it is half red. That was
evolution. Changing from a red and white stripe design
to solid green was revolution.
Most advertising follows the evolution pattern.
Companies will make minor changes in their packaging or in
their products so that the consumer will 1) recognize the
product and 2) notice that it has been changed for the
better. There is a subliminal message: "Our product has
always been terrific! There has never been a need to make any
major changes in it. Now we have discovered a way to make it
even better!" It's "new, improved Tide laundry detergent";
"get one third free in every bottle of Trakleen floor wax";
"extra-strength Tylenol"; "now you can enjoy our ice cream in
six new delicious flavors" etc.
Why do most advertisements follow this pattern? Surveys in
the Untied States show that 50% of the population thinks in
this fashion. The percentage is probably about the same in
other Westernized countries. There are five basic groups:
people who tend to see sameness only (10%); sameness with
some difference (50%); sameness with difference equally
(10%), difference with some sameness (25%) and difference
only (5%).
When you are communicating with someone, this can be a very
important consideration to bear in mind. How much
difference does your listener see (mismatchers) and
how much sameness (matchers)? Many people are
matchers in one context and mismatchers in
another. And you will want to adjust your communication style
accordingly if you want to get your message through and
reduce conflict.
Let's say you want to discuss with a friend or employee or
child about making a certain change in their life. For
example, you've decided that a child should change to a
different school. The child, let us say, is happy in the old
school. If the child is a matcher, you would certainly
want to point out how the schools are similar. For a
mismatcher, you would want to emphasize some of the
differences and how he might like those differences.
Often, the mismatcher will tend to disagree with you even if
you point out the differences and how he might like them. You
can circumvent this problem with the proper wording. You
might want to say something like, "I don't know if you
disagree with me or not -- why don't you think it over and
let me know?" With a strong mismatcher, you might even have
to say, "You probably won't agree, but think about it and let
me know." If you feel uncomfortable speaking in this manner,
keep in mind that statements like these can actually assist
the mismatcher. They neutralize his impulse to disagree and
thereby help him to see things more impartially and make a
more objective decision.
Sometimes in seminars, I will ask a comparison question to
help the participants understand more fully. For example,
"How does Los Angeles compare to New York City?" (Note: not
how are they the same or how they are different. Rather, how
do they compare.) Some people will respond: "Los Angeles and
New York are very different. Los Angeles has a tropical
climate, compared to New York. Los Angeles has a more relaxed
life-style. It is also much more spread out. New York has a
much larger Jewish population and is much more of a religious
center than Los Angeles."
Other people, however, will respond differently. They may
say, "Well, there are a lot of similarities when you think
about it. They're both large American cities. And they are
both coastal cities. Both of them have a wide spectrum of
ethnic groups. Property values run high in both cities, as
does the cost of living."
Then there are people who will point out both the differences
and the similarities. Some will put the similarities first
(sameness with difference) and some will put the differences
first (difference with sameness).
Many of us find it challenging to communicate with
mismatchers. It can be exasperating to have someone
constantly disagree with you! "It's hot outside. Did you know
that it is 37 degrees (98.6 Fahrenheit)?" They respond, "It's
not that hot -- it's only 36 degrees." A matcher would
probably say something like, "Yes, it really is hot outside,"
even if they know that it is `only' 36 degrees -- because he
matches your main point. The mismatcher naturally gravitates
to the one thing with which he can find exception. Two ways
of smoothing out your conversations with mismatchers are 1)
mismatch them back: "I just saw the thermometer outside -- 37
degrees." By mismatching their mismatching, you are
pacing them [see a previous article by S. Kory].
However, if you do this too much there is a risk of getting
into an argument. To avoid a confrontation (2) chunk
up [see S. Kory in Parshas Tetzave] to a higher
level of abstraction. The more abstract and general your
statement, the more difficult it becomes to argue with. You
could say, "One thing is for sure, it is not cold
outside!"
It is a mistake to think of mismatching as `wrong.' In
education as well as in other areas, it is important to be
able to see both similarities and differences. For instance,
in learning gemora, one needs the ability to see how things
are different in order to understand the question, and how
they are the same in order to understand the proof. Some
students have difficulty in seeing either similarities or
differences. These thought processes can be taught to them.
[To young children on an everyday basis, certainly.]
I read about an American corporation whose board meetings are
exceptionally productive. There are five partners. Four of
them are matchers and one is a mismatcher. First, the four
meet to brainstorm together and build on each others' ideas
until they come up with a concrete proposal. Then they invite
the fifth partner in. A mismatcher, he easily finds faults
and problems the others may have overlooked. Then they work
on how to correct these.
To match or to mismatch. You might say that it all boils down
to a question of what works and what doesn't. Or, you might
not...
