Display:
It can mean better service in volume and quality with the same number of civil servants.

Yes!

This is a key point, I think.  Instead of laying people off--unemployment benefit, sickness benefit, problems with families, in schools...etc...

Instead of that, just find the unproductive people and...give them new, more-productive tasks.  Always thinking in terms of projects: What is the aim?  Who do we need to do it?  What can we get those who we don't need for this project to do instead?

Maybe there'd be some slack in the system, but overall I think some slack is good...  Gives people a chance to regroup, retrain...  You have their support (because they're not being threatened with losing their jobs), and you have people in place for the...next task(s).

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Sun Feb 11th, 2007 at 07:05:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I mean, I agree with oldfrog's point about how you can do the same with a third less personnel, and that this extra third is a major financial...cost.  But turn it round, see it as a form of re-structuring...  If people aren't afraid of losing their jobs/salaries, they'll be better placed (psychologically?  Emotionally?  Intellectually?) to help find those one-third of improvements.  Someone mentioned previously (was it someone ? ;) that because of the relationship between the swedish unions and the employers, they can afford to start projects which don't succeed.  They can cut their losses because overall the workers are supported, so they don't hang on to the bitter end when the structure is failing...

Something like that...

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Sun Feb 11th, 2007 at 07:09:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series