To, for, or with

A driving instructor in Tabuk has three kinds of conversation in a week, and only one of them goes wrong.

The examiner at the test centre does something to her students. He watches, he marks, he decides. Nobody expects him to be warm about it, and nobody is upset when he is not.

The parents who book the lessons often want something done for them. Here is my son, here is the fee, please return him with a licence. A service, delivered.

The instructor herself works with the learner. She cannot turn the wheel on his behalf. The hours only count if he is the one sweating at the roundabout, making the mistakes and fixing them. Her job is to sit beside him while he changes.

None of these is wrong. A great deal of good business is done to people, in the sense that a referee or an inspector does it, and a great deal more is done for them, cleanly and without fuss.

The friction comes from the mismatch. The father who paid for a service and is told his son needs to practise every evening feels sold short. The learner who expected a partner and meets a box-ticker feels abandoned. The instructor who thought she had a willing partner finds she has a passenger.

Most complaints about a seller, a teacher or a doctor are not about quality at all. They are about two people who walked into the same room expecting different relationships, and never said so out loud.