RS> In some ways it gets worse as some of those fundamentals become more
RS> and more obvious. After a while you can look back over a few years
RS> and realise some of the senior management havent made a single
RS> sensible decision in the whole time you have known them. That doesnt
RS> do a hell of a lot for amicable relations in the future either |-)

AM> In the three years since we moved next door to our parent company,
AM> I've seen many changes or decisions on many aspects of the companies
AM> operation, that have been motivated for the wrong reasons - from
AM> hiring/firing, technical directions, recessionary but mis-directed
AM> cost cutting, decisions made on short term visions...  These idiots
AM> have the job of a lifetime  - to run a business and make money, yet
AM> they make such fundamentally bad decisions.  What gives?

They basically dont know what they are doing. So whats new ?  Most
people in any job dont.

AM> They are supposedly trained to make better decisions than I could ever
AM> make at my age, but mere hindsight throws that fact out into the
AM> 'urban myth' category.

I'm not even convinced myself that training is possible in the ultimate.
Just look at some of the issues we have been discussing in AVT, if you
basically dont have a logical and analytical outlook, you can train a
person like that as much as you like, it wont necessarily get you very
far. Tony Nugent is a classic example of that. You can give him the
training and he can certainly regurgitate the stuff he has been taught,
but he is still crippled by a fundamentally illogical and nutty approach
to life and there isnt a whole lot you can do about that.

Just look at the detail on the question of using asprin as a
preventative treatment for heart problems. He claims that everyone gets
enough asprin in their diet so they dont need supplementary asprin in
pill form. But that is completely at odds with the field trials which
show that supplementary asprin does give a measurable effect on heart
problems. So they cant be getting enough in their diet. When you cant
grasp fundamentally simple points of logic like that, you have buckleys
in doing much about it by training IMO.

You see the same thing with that business you just tried with that
software which is designed to thrash your system and make it heat up.
Quite a few people like Jolyon Robertson seem quite incapable of
actually trying it and seeing if it does what it claims. People like you
can try it and see.

In the case of management, I think half the problem is that people
instinctively assume its dead easy. In fact its a hell of a lot harder
to do well than you might think. Basically those clowns you are
criticising cant do it well. It just takes time for you to see enough
examples of their incompetence and mental approach before it becomes
clear that they dont.

In one place I worked at one time someone even found a quote from the
ancient romans about reorganisations and stuff and how destructive they
can be to any organisation. They clearly had just as much of a problem
with being run by incompetent fools at times as we do.

AM> For instance, they hired one guy a year ago who'd been 'out of the
AM> game' for god knows how long, and took at least twice as long to do a
AM> project than anyone else would.  Luckily the "three month trial
AM> period" concept was put to good use there, but not for his technical
AM> performance, or lack thereof, but his _personality_!

Yeah, thats one of the fundamental problems with recruitment, most
operations focus far too much on superficial trivia. Formal
qualifications and just the general personality stuff. Its rare
management that can see past that sort of stuff and decide someone is
very effective in spite of his feral habits or whatever.

It takes some seeing too. I worked for one place where the top banana
was widely regarded as a bit of a joke, funny old bugger. It was only
after he retired and was replaced by others it became much clearer what
an effective job he had been doing as his replacements got themselves
into deep shit quick smart.

He had some rather odd personality quirks which seemed to distract most
people from noticing how effective he actually was. For example he only
had the vaguest idea of who was actually working for the place at times,
was quite capable of saying to someone 'who is that visitor over there'
about someone who had been working there for a year or two. He even
managed to do it with his own chief clerk one time. Poor fellow went in
to ask about a raise and his future prospects. It became clear quite
quickly that the top banana didnt even know what he was doing in the
place |-)

Most of that stuff was just because he delegated very effectively and
those people were someone else responsibility. In fact the operation ran
far better under him than it ever did under anyone else in the sense of
getting stuff done effectively. Bit like many tech jobs. If you are
doing it well there is no drama. Many management people cant quite grasp
that.

AM> They've hired a new engineer that I'm working with now, and whist he's
AM> a nice guy and all, he's a fucking fibre-optic comms engineer!  He
AM> just decided he likes to play with motors and control applications,
AM> and so applied for the job - he obviously dazzled the GM with
AM> bullshit.  Now, the reality of his lack of experience is beginning to
AM> show, as the dead lines come and go... 

Yeah, OTW there is a very real problem with recruiting people. It really
is close to impossible to get a real handle on how effective someone can be.

Even probation periods arent that effective. There arent that many
people who can be rather cold hearted and piss people off if they arent
that effective. Then you have the problem that you have to recruit from
those who apply. If you dont get anyone better wanting to work there you
have a problem.

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb