By ignoring the wisdom of those with more experience, we end up repeatedly revisiting the same issues.

“History repeats itself over and over again, but most of us have short memories.” – Mike Colter, writing in Origin magazine, 2014

I feel that I should preface this article with an apology. I want to stress that in my thesis I am saying nothing new, and there is no censure or criticism of anyone in the process. There is, however, an implied apology from my younger self to anyone of a different generation whose wisdom I inadvertently dismissed due to my youthful enthusiasm to make my own mistakes. 

Let me explain. By a very rough calculation, I have spent more than three years of my life in meetings. These have included charitable committees, where the nature of the beast is more one of reporting on what has been done rather than making new decisions. Then there are the tick-box meetings of some universities, where nothing is actioned but the set agenda is completed so the powers-that-be erroneously believe something has been achieved. And lastly, there are the professional committees where high-achieving middle management, who know their time is precious, expeditiously discuss and debate pertinent pragmatic issues and proffer solutions and investigations. 

Committees are the linchpins of decision-making – and that is a human setting where memories are a real, earthly contribution that can be embraced or ignored

As you will infer, I am not a great fan of most meetings – apart from the last type noted. I have always believed that meetings in the public sector are held for the sake of the meeting, whereas those in the private sector and professional bodies are held to seek solutions. So it is odd that my thesis today is that it is the latter which fail to embrace the wisdom and experience of their elders.  

Let me expand. We all know the common adage that ‘if you want something done, give it to a busy man’, and that was always my experience in my early career. I never learned to say no, and my workload of 60-plus hours a week with few holidays became the pattern for my working life. But, as part of this, I was involved in societies and professional bodies from a very early age. Indeed, I was often the youngest on the various committees, including the RICS Red Book committee in the 1980s, and I was honoured that I was invariably asked to go away and suggest appropriate wording to resolve the issue identified in the meeting (much of the wording in today’s Red Book still uses my suggestions from that time). 

But what I want to stress is that there was invariably a senior member of the committee who sat silently until, being consulted on a specific point, explaining eloquently that an earlier incarnation of the same committee, 20 or so years previously, had considered the same matter and found such and such. At that point, as a general rule, the chair thanked the shaman in question and then duly decided to repeat the same research and discussions of decades ago, with the backing of the rest of the committee. 

As always, the wisdom of our elders was respected but ignored. So, why do we do that? Part of it is because we are over-enthusiastic to make our own mark and do our own thing. Likewise, we are all a little biased to believe that what we are doing is new and important – an acceptance that we are simply repeating something which has been considered before doesn’t sit comfortably within that philosophy. But I also believe that Western society has an inherent disregard of history. 

I have read numerous articles extolling the virtues of ‘corporate memory’; advocating that good knowledge management, data and corporate culture can ensure forward-looking strategies that prevent mistakes from being repeated. And yet, during 39 years in business and education, I have never seen this put into action. Memory is not ethereal; some of it can be captured in writings and professional guidance, but ultimately committees are the linchpins of decision-making – and that is a human setting where memories are a real, earthly contribution that can be embraced or ignored. Most of the time we ignore that fact, and we ignore the wisdom of those who have tangible memories.             

I might be trying to protect the usefulness of my own memories as I slowly age into the role of elder statesman. Maybe my ego wants people to listen to my experiences and expertise and to change their strategies accordingly, and I am afraid that in future meetings I will be ignored (it doesn’t matter how old we are, we all seek affirmation).

But I would like to think my musings are more egalitarian in nature and that it is simply my turn to highlight our collective distrust of wisdom from the more senior in our respective professions. I was talking with some of my university tutors last week after attending an online round table, and we were all saying how the feeling of corporate déjà vu was almost palpable. We all had our say but, with due deference to the new generation, we could tell that our experiences would be duly noted then ignored as a new strategy of repetition was moulded for today’s audience. 

What happens is behaviourally natural, and it will always happen no matter what I or anyone else says. Decisions will continue to be made in good faith, and it is right that the baton is passed to the new generation. What they do will be good and important, but to some of us the outcome will be an echo of what we have done before. Ultimately, memories are short and history always repeats itself. 

Lastly, I dare say that someone, 20 years ago, has already written everything I have just written – and someone else the same, decades before that. The irony is not lost on me.