HR implication of mass and inertia

Physics has lots of management wisdom to offer to the corporate leaders across the globe. Physics has defined that the objects with greater masses will have greater inertia. It means the objects with greater mass when reaches the state of inertia, greater force or energy is required to change them from their present state of inertia to a new state. Whereas the objects with relatively less mass are pliable to move easily from their state of ‘inertia’ to a new state with less energy or force and or time.

Most corporate often think that the people below the rank and file only can go lazy and can quickly goes into the state of inertia and hence need constant monitoring, mentoring, training, warning and rewarding etc. Further the top management and the HR function often feel that if they ever fail to guide, monitor, mentor and measure people in the loser cadre, the people might go directionless, lazy and berserk.

But the truth is different. The people in the helm of affairs and in the top management position are the one often goes into the state of inertia. These people have to be equated or compared with the objects that have greater mass. The people in the top management has greater influencing power, authority, freedom and of course money, as well.

On the contrary the people at the manager cadre, executives and officers can be compared to objects with less mass. The above comparison is only to draw the management meaning and otherwise such comparison hold no real reference. Therefore waking up those in lower cadre from their state of inertia, according to physics is easy. Whereas, to wakeup the people in the top management position and to shifts them from the state of inertia is not easy and all the more, greater energy is necessary to achieve the above.

Although the term ‘inertia’ cannot be equated with laziness, but definitely the stereotyped performance of people along with the state of inaction, indecisiveness, indifference, resistance to change etc, can definitely be compared with state of inertia.

But unfortunately, none in the corporate dares to blame people in the top management level. Even the HR trainers never do so mainly because they do not wants to upset the top management and adversely affect own business interest. Hence most HR trainers love to point fingers only at people in the lower to middle level and insist that this group of people only need continuous mentoring.

The interesting point is that often people in the top management are always ‘brain drain’, lazy, indifferent and are in a state of inertia. To change these people, larger effort and intense training programmes are required. For example, if a manager can be changed with one or two behavioural training session, the CEO’s, VP’s etc., might need at least 10-15 such sessions to change. It is as simple as greater energy is required to move objects with greater mass than objects with lesser mass.

Only the state of inertia of top management causes many perennial problems to the corporate and not due to people at the lower level. If the HR function does not want to learn anything from biology, learn at least from Newton’s Law.