|
|
A queue, a condition, which has baffled scientists, psychologists and psychiatrists alike, a child’s spelling nightmare and a word which adults never even want to hear, a portrait of human orderliness, yet a vivid example of human incompetence.
There are so many ways by which we could examine it but whichever way we look at it, we have to try to define the significance of a queue and then come to terms with the fact that it has done almost nothing to cancel the effects of our impatience. From my perspective, a queue is only a means to an end, an organization and the end is by far more important. Now the question we should ask is: Is the means achieving the end? And the answer: partially.
I have adopted this position because of the inferences I deduced from my observation of a typical queue. Now, take a case study of a queue at a large Central Bank complex. The people here would on the average consist of moderately rich people, people who have enough money to necessitate storage in a bank. As expected, the queue was regular and quiet, as a queue ought to be. Therefore, I inferred that the orderliness was based on relative material comfort. However I noticed, quite distinctly, that the queue was restless and the customers were quick to occupy any unattended space.
Another case study was of queue at a local grocery store where most of the customers were local people who would be grouped into the lower class, but who had a sense of unity that comes from living together for quite some time. The line was very orderly and it seemed that the attitude of the people there was of responsibility toward other people. They seemed to know what was expected of them, like one huge family.
Then consider a queue for food by habitants of a disaster-relief camp. To be candid, it was not in actual fact a queue, but was considered to be one only because the people around regarded it as such. The shoving and shunting was reflective of the psychological and physical distress that the people there felt. It took strong action by law enforcement officers to restore and maintain order.
From my observations, there appears to be a close link between what people “feel” what people “have” and what people “do”. This is a general rule – someone who is materially and emotionally comfortable will have a more stable attitude.
However, a rule usually has exceptions and this rule in particular has so many exceptions that it may no longer be considered as a rule but as a hypothesis. For example, some time ago, I was standing in line to receive a British passport. The closing time was drawing near and people were getting jittery. What happened next was, to say the least, surprising. A well-dressed gentleman, who looked every bit as elegant and important as a millionaire (evidently he was), barged in and without even stopping to consider the waiting queue, proceeded to the very front and demanded to be attended to immediately. This action, of course, elicited a violent response from the already tense crowd – a response that had to be put out by the security.
Also, research has proved that Americans will avoid a queue by every way they can, and they show a high degree of impatience when inevitably caught in one. Britons will normally stand in line for as long as necessary, but they will not tolerate a shunt. Other societies exhibit varying degrees of responses and it is apparent from these responses that the orderliness of a queue also depends on the societal setting.
The nature of a queue is a vivid reflection of the state of mind of the people. The state of mind of a person will be determined by several factors. They include material prosperity, physical wellness, intelligence and enlightenment (which bring order to a queue); and poverty, illness, illiteracy, and mental distress (which bring disorder to a queue). All these factors, including the societal setting, are considered separately because each factor can act on its own or in accordance with other factors to determine a person’s state of mind.
Therefore, in our world today, whether or not we regard a queue as a social problem will affect our response to it. I consider it as problem because queues will be non-existent if there is efficient discharge of duties. But the fact cannot be ignored that the queue serves as an appropriate solution to inefficiency, but its misuse must not be ignored or condoned.
Wherever possible, a queue must be avoided by the provision of adequate machinery to eliminate inefficiency. If, as will sometimes be the case, a queue cannot be avoided, then the state of mind of the people on the queue is essential to maintain order.
Since the background of the individuals on a queue cannot be altered, it is necessary to provide a helpful environment for an excellent behavior. A setting with adequate esthetic comfort (for example, attractive furniture) and a good sense of togetherness (which can be cultivated by a good quality customer-to-customer and client-to-customer rapport) will go a long way in ensuring the stability of a queue. Queues have come to stay, naturally, but they can be made more tolerable by stabilizing the determinant for the integrity of a queue – the human emotion.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Temi Ige
This user has not written anything in his panorama profile yet.
|
Comments
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
