As Warren Buffett also says, Berkshire Hathaway has no committees. Imagine a public sector without committees - a world where people just get on with whatever they are supposed to be doing instead of talking about it.
The video indirectly highlights another problem, competition for the best people, there are only so many of them. It can be a problem within an organisation where a good manager attracts the best people and lesser managers are stuck with the duds.
"It can be a problem within an organisation where a good manager attracts the best people and lesser managers are stuck with the duds."
In an ideal world the duds would be given to a good manager - who would either rehabilitate them or fire them after due process. Unfortunately the lesser managers have no ability or enthusiasm for the task.
Most of the committees we had at work were, in effect, standing committees. They met to oversee and scrutinise an aspect of work, regardless of whether it was going well or badly. It would have been better, I think, if people had only met up for ad hoc purposes.
Having said that, committees were good places to get information. Upcoming dates, changes in other areas, etc.
DJ - in my experience, the public sector has a high tolerance for duds, possibly because dud processes obscure responsibilities. It's not so much a problem with serious duds such as drunks or crooks, they can be dealt with, although even that can take far longer than it should.
Sam - most of the committees we had were standing committees too. I find it interesting to speculate on working life as I knew it but without such committees. Many middle managers wouldn't have enough to do.
3 comments:
"It can be a problem within an organisation where a good manager attracts the best people and lesser managers are stuck with the duds."
In an ideal world the duds would be given to a good manager - who would either rehabilitate them or fire them after due process. Unfortunately the lesser managers have no ability or enthusiasm for the task.
Most of the committees we had at work were, in effect, standing committees. They met to oversee and scrutinise an aspect of work, regardless of whether it was going well or badly. It would have been better, I think, if people had only met up for ad hoc purposes.
Having said that, committees were good places to get information. Upcoming dates, changes in other areas, etc.
DJ - in my experience, the public sector has a high tolerance for duds, possibly because dud processes obscure responsibilities. It's not so much a problem with serious duds such as drunks or crooks, they can be dealt with, although even that can take far longer than it should.
Sam - most of the committees we had were standing committees too. I find it interesting to speculate on working life as I knew it but without such committees. Many middle managers wouldn't have enough to do.
Post a Comment