My organization just blows them off and/or set them in some darkened corner to be ignored. Or worse yet, my organization fires them! And when somethings goes wrong managemetn finds or sets up a pattsy!
CK
of FL
@
Jan 27, 2009 06:10:49 AM
Ignoring the issue
Our computing center had a catastrophic outage last week. Our CIO was blaming the center manager. The center manager's reaction? "I've been telling you of this problem for 7 years and each time you would cut it from the budget!" (He has the e-mails to prove it!)
But it is amaizing that the CIO started pointing fingers at everyone first without realizing it was HE who ultimately caused the issue that could have been prevented!
CK
of FL
@
Jan 26, 2009 06:51:43 AM
One More Agreeing With Chris
Chris's comments are absolutely on target. Unfortunately, I encounter too much of what he cites -- often as the outsider hired to do an assessment and provide the critique to management. Most of the time, I believe management has the best of intentions, sometimes they are going through the motions. In the end, regardless of the starting point, too often there is really not an audience for the critique.
I'm often reminded of the Jack Nicoholson line in the movie "A Few Good Men," where as Tom Cruise challenges him "I want the truth!" and Nicholson responds, "You can't handle the truth....you don't want the truth...."
As Chris points out, does management really want to see or hear the evidence that they are failing in even the smallest ways? In my experiences, despite all assurances when challenging them on this, it is only the most special leaders that really do.
Dave Brock
of CA
@
Jan 24, 2009 10:19:50 AM
Totally Agree with Chris
Been there done that. I used to play the "maverick" role partly because I'm a naturally pragmatic person and partly because I was forced into doing so mainly because I disliked being thrown in to projects that were clearly doomed to fail. What did I get for my efforts? The label of being "negative" and "not a team player."
Who cares if I saved the company thousands in lost productivity and R&D costs?
It really takes an approach from the top to keep companies from being their own worst enemies.
Negative Nelly
of WA
@
Jan 23, 2009 17:28:06 PM
Nice in theory but...
While this seems like a novel and useful concept, as one of those mavericks, I can tell you that it has a few major flaws. The first is that if the management of an organization is, well, too immature, they do not want to ever hear or see evidence that they are failing in even the smallest regard. I have watched corporate initiatives start with the best of intentions that bog down in the details of implementation. When the fact is pointed out that the bog down is both occurring and that the cleanup or consequences of the dog down will have a cost associated, you are considered a pessimist and non-supporter. The reaily is actually the opposite. So the first flaw is whether there is an audience for such critique. The second is a plan vs. react business mindset. When an organization is based heavily on the "right" fast response to customers or internal demands, a 5 or 10 year mindset goes out the window in the day to day decisions. Granted, a capable CEO, chairman, or manager should be fulfilling this strategic role but all too often, especially with a very flat organization or one undergoing layoffs, it is hard to maintain. The final flaw, from experience, is scoping size of failure. For a disaster to be taken seriously, a measure of cost has to be estimated. If you estimate too low, your warning is marginalized in presentation. If you overestimate, you risk scaring people with cry wolf warnings. But if the estimate is not high enough for attention, the cost may not be sufficient to garner prevention.
I have seen this both personally and consistently over the past decade in both public and private, small firms and large corporations, and in both well-led and myopic departments. The concept is good but the execution requires more than a small set of mavericks kicking over any stone they can find.
CK of FL @ Jan 27, 2009 06:10:49 AM
CK of FL @ Jan 26, 2009 06:51:43 AM
Dave Brock of CA @ Jan 24, 2009 10:19:50 AM
Negative Nelly of WA @ Jan 23, 2009 17:28:06 PM
Chris of NJ @ Jan 23, 2009 12:29:00 PM
Back to blog