Meat+Poultry - July 2021 - 94

FROM THE CORRAL
Adding by subtracting
There was a fascinating study
published in the journal Nature that
studied how people solve different
types of problems. Gabrielle Adams
and her colleagues at the University of
Virginia found that people will often
choose a more complicated solution
by adding something when the best
answer instead would be to remove
something. One of the problems they
presented was a house made of Legos
that had a flat roof supported by one
unstable column. Participants were
instructed to modify the Lego house so
it would support a single brick placed
on the roof. There are two ways this
problem could be solved. You could
either add three columns to hold up
the unstable roof or choose a simpler
solution. That solution is to remove
the single unstable column and lay
the flat roof down on the sidewalls of
the house. Most people choose to add
three columns, while the simple answer
would be removing the one unstable
column and lowering the roof.
This tendency of people to add
something instead of subtracting
something may help explain why
bureaucracy has a tendency to grow.
The University of Virginia researchers
also studied archived data at their
university to observe the evolution
of rules and regulations over time.
When the university president asked
students and faculty how to serve their
community better, 89% chose to add a
regulation - only 11% chose to remove
a regulation, program or standard
practice. People were more likely to
choose the additive solution. That
may explain why bureaucracy grows
more complex.
After reading this article, I thought
about two extremely successful
products that used a subtractive
approach. When Google was first
released, it had a plain white screen
and there was nothing to learn. The
screen contained the name Google and
a single search box. Previous search
engines had complicated instructions
about " and " and " or " functions. They
were more difficult to use. Zoom
video conferences software is another
example of a subtractive approach. It
became wildly popular because people
did not have to learn how to use it.
During the pandemic, I sometimes had
to use horrible platforms where I had
to have an hour-long training session.
Streamyard is another program that is
becoming popular. I figured out how to
use it by myself with no training.
One might ask: " What does this
study have to do with the meat
industry? " One of the reasons why
the North American Meat Institute
animal welfare guidelines have become
popular is that they are simple. When
the guidelines were first started in the
1990s, they had five core criteria and
six acts of abuse. Two additional core
criteria were added that were really
needed, which included access to water
and absence of willful acts of abuse.
The guidelines worked extremely
well, but over the years there has
been a tendency to make them more
complicated by adding exceptions to
the criteria. Traffic rules work because
they are simple. Both drunk driving and
speeding are measured with devices
that provide objective numbers. Stop
signs mean stop.
Some of the animal welfare audits
that have been developed for farms are
way too complicated. Too many things
are being measured and the sampling
procedures are too complex. To be
effective, you have to keep the really
important core criteria such as drunk
driving and speeding for traffic and
stunning efficacy, vocalization, electric
prod use and falls for slaughter.
When I was working in the field
designing equipment, I used to
say, " Think simple. " On a piece of
equipment, I would say to myself, " Can
I use three air cylinders instead of six? "
Sometimes less is more.
TEMPLE GRANDIN | meatpoult r y@sos land.com
Some of the animal welfare audits
that have been developed for farms
are way too complicated.
94 MEAT+POULTRY | 07.21 | www.meatpoultry.com
Rosalie Winard
http://www.meatpoultry.com
Meat+Poultry - July 2021

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat+Poultry - July 2021
