It is an old human habit to judge a thing, situation or person by outer appearance. In such cases the substance is often overlooked for form. This practice has been often found faulty for it uses quantitative terms in place of qualitative terms. Though in visual mediums, like commercial cinema or fashion , the style factor can be valid but even then if the end product does not have sufficient substance it could not boast longevity.
Age old Wisdom
The fable of the hare and tortoise stands testimony to this debate. While the confident and boastful hare had time for a trivial nap, the tortoise steadily focussed on its goal and reached the end line first. Style is valid as long as the substance is steadily supporting it.
Thus, leaving the fixed lines of style for thinkers and artists , any profit-making outfit should rather concentrate on substance. There are a few simple lines on which this can be achieved.
- Any ‘golden rule’ should not be blindly followed without readapting it with advancing time and technology. For example, certain sections where manual labour was employed must digitally revamp their working platform with changing needs and aims.
- Doing fruitful work is not synonymous with being visibly busy. Spending time doing trivial work is not necessarily more profitable , than just sitting and coming up with a brilliant idea.
- Working on the consolidation of your project is more outcome-inducing , than spending time doing petty pleasantries and tasks that your subordinates could handle.
- Another important aspect where style deceives the most is when the outward appearance of an employee sets the criteria for increments or promotions. The ones who dress shabbily or have erratic working hours could have equal or more potential as the ones who stay prim and proper.
- Before wrongly assessing others on their abilities, you should also rethink your own position. To inspire your employees to productivity, looking good might not matter but good work will.