Rules and Rituals


Matt Richtel investigates the mystery of why laptops and not iPads need to be pulled out of bags for the X-Ray machine at airport security.

From the New York Times


Richtel contacts the TSA and security experts, but doesn’t really get a good answer. The TSA said that it had its reasons but declined to share them saying that “the agency didn’t want to betray any secrets.” Another security expert called it “security theater”, implying that making passengers go through some inconvenience makes it look like the government is taking their security seriously!

The problem of course is that electronic devices come in all sizes. Rules are best applied to clearly defined categories. Categorization of devices based upon size is just not practical. There has to be an easy way for TSA and passenger to unambiguously agree on the categorization that then leads to the application of the rule “the device comes outside the bag for the X-Ray machine”.

Is it a laptop? (Y/N) is an easy way to categorize. Is it more than 1 cubic foot? (Y/N) will just not work.

The real world presents a lot of ‘continuous functions’. Sometimes you have rules based upon categories like single/married or male/female that are clearly defined (more in some states than in other). But most of the time you categorize by drawing a line on the graph of a continuously varying function like age. You can vote when you are 18. You can drink when you are 21 etc.

What is the right age at which you can vote? Actually age may not have much to do with it. Education, mental maturity may have more to do with it. But those are harder to measure or indisputably agree on. So age is the best proxy.

The voting age does differ from country to country, so obviously there isn’t one right answer. But once it is in place, a rule like the voting age, just digs itself in. It becomes very difficult to change. Status quo itself has inertia. Additionally, there may be vested interests that are pushing at it from both sides. It becomes very difficult to change. Greece’s early retirement age, for instance (55).

Rules like clean categories. If the real world presents continuous functions, rule makers chop up the continuous function to create clean categories. Once these categories are created, they are very difficult to change.

There is another property of rules. You can always add more. They are very much like things carved in stone. You can’t erase them, but you can always add more.

It’s tax season here in the US. The US tax code is a labyrinth of rules and loopholes and rules to close loopholes that is impossible to deal with. Everyone agrees that it is far too complex. But somehow law makers keep adding more deductions, more rules to the tax code.

The most interesting thing about rules is how they eventually become rituals. Rules endure, and outlive the rule makers. On the way, generations of rule makers keep adding more rules, but they never take anything away. One day the rule makers no longer know why the rules exist. But they keep enforcing them. They have become the priests and the rules, rituals.

Here’s a Zen story that hits home


I recently met the CIO of a leading news media company. He said that over time their Marketing department had added so many “special offers” for their newspaper that they now had 1200 of them in their system. Nobody really understood all of them. But they were afraid to remove them. Why change something that wasn’t broken? Apparently there was a rogue link in some forum which gave readers a free 3 month trial period even if they were current subscribers! But that was a small price to pay.

Businesses, especially big business, has its share of rules and rituals. Some of it is necessary. Some of it isn’t. The cost to business from unnecessary rules is enormous. It slows down progress. It gets in the way of much needed change. It saps the energy of people. They end up spending so much of their passion attacking and defending rules and justifying exceptions, which could be used constructively.

The only way to keep business agile is to constantly subject its rules to the sunlight of logic. Why do we have this rule in place? Did we make this rule when the conditions were different from what they are today? Do we completely understand the costs of this rule and have we weighed them against the benefits? Does anyone even remember why we have this rule?

Like zero based budgeting, we should be talking about zero-based rules.


7 Responses to Rules and Rituals

  1. kannan amaresh says:

    every corporation of some size goes through this rules issues as it works, no one wants to question the logic or even have time really to stop and question and find the real reasons. this is where typically consulting business thrives. a younger industry like IT, the more you systematically breaks it (rules) and have identified change functions, there will be long term impact to various stakeholders!


  2. Meena says:

    Loved your post. We are raised to be conformists. The rank and file in many traditional organizations are rewarded to conform rather than question or break the rules.


  3. Nishith says:

    Mass rules need to be clear cut by nature otherwise they will never get implemented. The thumb rule though should be to have as few rules as possible and to keep trying to whittle down that list further. Easier said than done though – too few and there is no purpose or unity , too many and you suck out creativity and joy. Watch “Khoobsurat” for a delightful illustration.


  4. Dip says:

    Almost any botanical garden or zoo in India has high entry fee for still camera and even higher for video camera. And mobiles go free (even a non-smart phone is decent camera these days). Instead of ticketing and policing gadgets, you increase the entry fee for every adult human..


  5. Sid says:

    Rules are often made reactively and once made are rarely reviewed. Rules are also a proxy for poor policy planning. Some people make rules just to show that they can and their intent for change is low. The reward for compliance or penalty for lack of is what generally drives people behavior. e.g. Speeding rules. The coming of an organization is when it needs no rules; employees return trust posed in them with respect to organization and its affiliates. I would encourage organizations to be active about building faith and trust with its actions rather than constructing compliance cocoons. e.g. Certification rules.


  6. Ain says:

    To contemporary Americans, the Armistead family’s treatment of the Star-Spangled Banner—marking up the stars and stripes with signatures, cutting off pieces to give away as souvenirs—might seem strange or inappropriate, even though it was customary at the time. Today an extensive set of rules, known as the U.S. Flag Code, defines the proper way to treat the American flag. But in fact, these rules and customs surrounding the flag date back only to the late 19th century.


  7. The rules are meant to run a system (organization,society,any body dealing with more then one) smoothly and yet keep the practicality. But funny or unbelievable part is that more we look at them critically and more they will appear to be irrelevant. May be this is because a rule is made to solve single issue or problem and analyzed in much broader context by us.


Leave a Reply


You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s