In a sociological experiment, seminary students were placed in a “Good Samaritan” situation. The students were sent to a location across campus with a task. One group was told that they were very late to their assignment. The other group, same task, no sense of urgency.
The task was to lead a panel in a discussion of the “Good Samaritan” parable. (too funny)
In their path, there was an actor who portrayed a man in need of assistance – moaning, coughing, and wrapped in a threadbare blanket.
How many stopped and rendered assistance? Those with a sense of urgency – 10%. (?!?) Those without a sense of urgency – 60%.
Were the students who stopped “better” people than those who didn’t? I don’t think so.
Was the Samaritan “better” than the Levite? I don’t know.
What is the difference?
I contend it is our environment. Our environment wildly impacts our actions. Often, it is more effective to focus our resources in changing our environment to support our goals before addressing changes in our actions.
Similarly, successful leaders focus on improving the environment before trying to improve people.
“…one cannot but wonder how an environment can make people despair and sit idle and then, by changing the conditions, one can transform the same people into matchless performers.”
– Muhammad Yunus
