Things to Make and Do
Go to the search button on the upper right corner of the message board window.
Open it and go to the 'author search' slot.
Put 'Elaine' into the author search slot and select 'all forums' and 'all dates.'
There are just 5 posts by Elaine, making this quite manageable.
Read them, starting from the earliest to the most recent one.
You will see a pattern that matches what I privately term 'sleeper troll' -- someone who starts off helpfully, but drops a few clues here and there.
And in the most recent post, drops the facade and reveals the actual allegiance.
Any time someone's posted material gives an 'iffy feeling' do this kind of auditing of someone's written output.
We had to learn to do this over on the Byron Katie thread, given the number of disruptive visitors who showed up.
Any concerns or doubts...take em to Mr. Ross.
A Harvard Forum For Self-Promotion?
Boston Globe/November 6, 1998
By Alex BeamQuote
The Forum, formally known as the Landmark Education Corp., has enjoyed considerable success with the self-actualization crowd, and with the Cambridge intelligentsia. That success is now chronicled in an HBS case study so sycophantic that Landmark has been using it -- improperly, Harvard says -- as a promotional tool.
The document, originally written for classroom discussion, is also sold to the public. Last revised in April, it reads like a 22-page advertisement for Landmark's "breakthrough in paradigm thinking."
Authored by professor Karen Hopper Wruck, the case breathlessly quotes Forum executives who compare their work to that of Galileo and Socrates (!). The study also quotes from a Forum-sponsored Daniel Yankelovich survey of graduates. Surprise! All six veterans of the Forum's weekend training quoted by Wruck loved it!
In her defense, Wruck told me: "I understood that it was a controversial company, but I wanted to study a company that directly addressed issues around human behavior. A case study is a pedagogical vehicle, not a position paper or an endorsement." Harvard has affixed an unprecedented disclaimer ("Please be aware that . . . the school does not endorse this company or any other company") to the document.
Mark Kamin, a Landmark spokesman, said his company ordered several thousand copies of the document after it was published.
He adds that Landmark signed an agreement with Harvard not to use the case for promotional purposes, "and we've endeavored to keep that agreement."
When I told him that a recent seminar attendee said the case was being used to puff Landmark, Kamin said, "I can't guarantee that people who led seminars didn't say, 'Hey, there's this case study.' "
From a more recent article which can be read here:Quote
From a longer article which can be read in full here:
To validate Landmark commercially, there is the "Harvard study". My copy has on it the Harvard seal (Veritas ["Truth"]), the heading "Harvard Business School", a copyright attribution to The President and Fellows of Harvard College in one footnote, and a disclaimer in another: Harvard doesn't actually endorse this document. No wonder: it was only a business case study for classroom use.
Harvard forbids the promotional use of these studies. This is to prevent professors from purveying advertising in Harvard's name.
Note: This next article describes more LEC pressure in the work place. It refers to an attempt by LEC to sue RR.com out of existence. This efford did not succeed.Quote
"(One of LEC's attorneys) provided a copy of a Harvard Business School report from 1998 that gave Landmark passing grades. "
Ross' pro bono lawyer is Peter Skolnick, a renowned intellectual property and First Amendment lawyer. His clients include David Chase, creator of "The Sopranos," and the estate of Vladimir Nabokov, author of "Lolita."
Skolnick said Landmark is now trying to withdraw the lawsuit -- but he's fighting on behalf of Ross to keep it alive. Skolnick wants to pursue discovery he believes will confirm that Landmark threatens lawsuits against individuals and news organizations that are critical of Landmark. These are typically settled, Skolnick said, in return for a statement by the defendant backing off from criticisms.
"We asked the court to give us discovery to show that the case [against Ross] was not brought in good faith," he said.
Schreiber said in response that Skolnick "knows or should know" that it is not the practice of Landmark to bring bad-faith lawsuits to harass critics or unfriendly journalists. He declined comment on whether Landmark was trying to withdraw the lawsuit against Ross, saying that it is matter of pending litigation.
The case is being heard by U.S. District Judge John C. Lifland in Newark, N.J.
Skolnick said he hopes the court will place conditions on any withdrawal of the lawsuit against Ross by Landmark that will make it difficult for it to bring these types of lawsuits in the future.
As you can see, RR.com and its message board are still here, three years later.
Note: 'a Harvard Business School report' is NOT THE SAME AS A DOUBLE BLIND RESEARCH STUDY.
And it is not the same as a double blind research study funded by an independent source with no vested interest in proving or disproving LEC's efficacy. (double blind is where participants are randomly assigned to different interventions, without the researchers knowing--this is to prevent bias)
Any time someone says 'we have a study' 1) find out who paid for it and two find out if it really was done according to scientific research protocol, rather than being a case study for classroom use.
A case study intended for classroom use, even at a top ten business school is not the same thing as something funded by an independent reseach grant, according to double blind protocol.
Referring to 'the Harvard Study' doesnt tell the average person whether it was a position paper intended for use within Harvard's Business school, or was done by scientists who submitted this for review by a human subjects committee before doing that study at the Harvard U medical center, or its psychology department.
Another thing to do is assess how much independent research was done how recent those studies are.
And...who funded them. And..whether they are merely case studies, or conducted according to double blind protocol.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2008 10:09PM by corboy.
I am sorry that I did not write sooner. I have been so tired from fighting with him about going to the Landmark & like I said in my earlier post... I isolate when things get bad. I am so naive to think that he would just go & it would be the end of it after this weekend to keep his job & he promised him a raise too. The damn almighty dollar! I just read that one of the things they say at the landmark is that after going to the Landmark most people will make 30% more money & what do you know I figured out his raise his boss promised after going this weekend & what do you know it figures to be 30% Jeez.... I hope that he can see thru this, but I am afraid that he has been brainwashed already. Thanks for letting me ramble on again....