The bureaucracy for the bureaucracy is very-crazy!

Bureaucracy has been defined as the combined organizational structure, procedures, protocols, and set of regulations in place to manage  activity, usually in large organizations. It is often represented by standardized procedure (rule-following) that guides the execution of most or all processes within the body; formal division of powers; hierarchy; and relationships, intended to anticipate needs and improve efficiency (source: Wikipedia).

Has bureaucracy realized its intentions? Judging from the way the government sector is vilified by its public, the answer is an obvious no. Why so? The government bureaucrats get much obsessed with the rules, regulations, and procedures that they readily lost sight of what they were supposed to do in the first place.  The process becomes more important than the output supposed to be produced.

If bureaucracy is harsh on the public, it is much more so on the government employees themselves. Imagine a bureaucracy for the bureaucracy. It is very-crazy.
(images from http://www.powayusd.com and http://positivesharing.com/)

Female power rise poses challenges

The Economist says that the gradual women empowerment in the last 50 years, though a welcome development for both sexes, have brought social consequences that will be the challenge of the next 50 years.

Hillary Clinton noted that her 18M votes in the primaries represent 18M cracks (pun intended?) in the ceiling. Women now make up half of the work force in many economies. In the other economies where it is not, the ratio of women in the work force is rising.

How did this come about? Politics (feminism) brought governments to pass equal-rights laws. Economics and technology also did their share. The demand for brain power grew as the world entered the post-industrialized era.

Demand has been matched by supply: women are increasingly willing and able to work outside the home. Women now have more time to work as the time for traditional traditional female work of cleaning and cooking was reduced by better technology at home. Additionally, the contraceptive pill and family planning became widely accepted. The pill has not only allowed women to get married later, it has also increased their incentives to invest time and effort in acquiring skills.

But the men still dominate the upper ranks of management. In America and Britain the typical full-time female worker earns only about 80% as much as the typical male. The article says prejudice may be the key but there is a deeper reason why this is so: many women are forced to choose between motherhood and careers. Childless women earn almost as much as men, but mothers with partners earn less and single mothers much less. The cost of motherhood is steep for women. Child rearing deprives the women of the time to gain the professional experience/education that they could have. The reason for the income gap may thus be the opposite of prejudice. It is that women are judged by exactly the same standards as men.

This Hobson's choice is imposes a high cost on both individuals and society. Many professional women reject motherhood entirely. Others delay child-bearing for so long that they later resort to fertility clinics. Some may opt not to work at all, thus depleting the collective investment in talent. But a choice must be made. Studies found out that, years after graduation, just over half of those who had chosen to have children were working full-time. About a quarter were working part-time and just under a quarter had left the labor force. Almost all of women who left work to have children want to return to work. But only 74% managed to return, and just 40% returned to full-time jobs.

While making women work leaves too little time for their children, this trend will continue. The rising cost of living and the empowered women's mind makes this a necessity. In the west child care takes a sizable portion of the family budget, and many childminders are untrained. The private sector can make more women-friendly and family-friendly work environments. Governments can make school hours coincide with working hours so the children can be at school while their parents work. But quitting work to look after the children can mean financial disaster.

This is where the Philippines' extended family system come in handy. Our extended family and the practice of grandparents staying with the family afford working moms to have caretakers for the children.

Ok work hard, but work on the right thing!

I came upon a link shared by a Facebook buddy, about why working hard is overrated. Caterina Fake, founder of Flickr, argues that working hard is not really the magic thing that leads to great inventions or successful outcomes. She says working on the right thing is probably more important than working hard. She continues:

Much more important than working hard is knowing how to find the right thing to work on. Paying attention to what is going on in the world. Seeing patterns. Seeing things as they are rather than how you want them to be. Being able to read what people want. Putting yourself in the right place where information is flowing freely and interesting new juxtapositions can be seen. But you can save yourself a lot of time by working on the right thing. Working hard, even, if that's what you like to do.

But just how do we know we're working on the right thing? In her followup post, Caterina says the only way to gauge that is instinct, gut feel, or the spine-tingling sensation you feel when you encounter a great work of literature, as Nabokov (of Lolita fame) says. Getting the right thing generally requires exploring lots of ideas, fleshing out a few, ruminating on them, and throwing almost all of them out. She quotes Steve Jobs, "People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the 100 other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I'm actually as proud of the many things we haven't done as the things we have done."

The Age of Unreason

"George Bernard Shaw once observed that all progress depends on the unreasonable man. His argument was that the reasonable man adapts himself to the world, while the unreasonable persists in trying to adapt the world to himself; therefore for any change of consequence we must look to the unreasonable man.

While in Shaw's day, perhaps, most men were reasonable, we are now entering an Age of Unreason, when the future, in so many areas, is there to be shaped, by us and for us—a time when the only prediction that will hold true is that no predictions will hold true; a time, therefore, for bold imaginings in private life as well as public, for thinking the unlikely and doing the unreasonable."

- Charles Handy, The Age of Unreason
# ISBN-10: 0875842461
# ISBN-13: 978-0875842462

The recipe for a successful new systems installation

My experience in installing information systems brought me to many places. I've installed systems to rural barangays, mid-level bureaus, and high level administrators. Sometimes not all users readily embrace change. More often it is the younger set that are more willing to absorb new things.

The Ant

From an email. Click on play to advance slides manually.

Ant - Management Lesson

The Ant
A Fable...
Or
May be not....

Every day, a small ant arrives at work very early and starts work immediately.

She produces a lot and she was happy.

The Chief, a lion, was surprised to see that the ant was working without supervision.

He thought if the ant can produce so much without supervision, wouldn’t she produce even more if she had a supervisor!

So he recruited a cockroach who had extensive experience as supervisor and who was famous for writing excellent reports.

The cockroach’s first decision was to set up a clocking in attendance system.

He also needed a secretary to help him write and type his reports and …

… he  recruited a spider, who managed the archives and monitored all phone calls.

The lion was delighted with the cockroach's reports and asked him to produce graphs to describe production rates and to analyze trends, so that he could use them for presentations at Board meetings.

So the cockroach had to buy a new computer and a laser printer and …

… recruited a fly to manage the IT department.

The ant, who had once been so productive and relaxed, hated this new plethora of paperwork and meetings which used up most of her time…!

The lion came to the conclusion that it was high time to nominate a person in charge of the department where the ant worked.

The position was given to the cicada, whose first decision was to buy a carpet and an ergonomic chair for his office.

The new person in charge, the cicada, also needed a computer and a personal assistant, who he brought from his previous department, to help him prepare a Work and Budget Control Strategic Optimization Plan …

The Department where the ant works is now a sad place, where nobody laughs anymore and everybody has become upset …

It was at that time that the cicada convinced the boss, the lion, of the absolute necessity to start a climatic study of the environment.

Having reviewed the charges for running the ant’s department, the lion found out that the production was much less than before.

So he recruited the owl, a prestigious and renowned consultant to carry out an audit and suggest solutions.

The owl spent three months in the department and came up with an enormous report, in several volumes, that concluded: “The department is overstaffed …”

Guess who the lion fires first?

The ant, of course, because she “showed lack of motivation and had a negative attitude".

You must have seen so many ants and you may be one among them

NB:
The characters in this fable are fictitious; any resemblance to real people or  facts within the Corporation is pure coincidence…

The end
Adapted from Portuguese by PR. Obrigado Mário.

Inertia not initiative prevails in bureaucracy

This quotes Bob Nelson, author of the best-selling book, 1001 Ways to Take Initiative at Work, ISBN: 076111405X

[start of quote]
"Taking the initiative" can mean many things--tapping inner creativity, tackling a persistent problem, capitalizing on opportunities, or creating ways to improve customer services or current work environment. By taking initiative in any of these ways, employees can elevate their visibility in the organization and greatly enhance their chances for recognition, learning, advancement, pay raises and bonuses, as well as have a more meaningful and exciting time at work.

Here are some ways any employee can take greater initiative in his or her job, voiced in a way that you could give directly to your employees or managers. It's one thing to tell your employees to take greater initiative, but another to provide them with easy and clear ways to do it.

Ways To Take More Initiative In Your Job

Thinking Outside the Box: Innovation--thinking outside the box--is the spark that keeps organizations moving ever onward and upward. To think outside the box, look for new combinations, ask "what if" or develop "what-if" scenarios, consider approaches you've never considered before, brainstorm with others, and be a champion of new ideas.

Doing Your Homework: Preparation is often the key to success in any endeavor. You will be more successful in convincing others that what you believe is the right thing, if you are armed and ready with the facts. Taking the initiative to do your homework means doing the basic research necessary to back up your claims, such as obtaining necessary information, determining costs and benefits, making calculations, and/or gaining buy-in from others who will be affected.

Taking Action--Capitalizing on Opportunities: Taking action can often be a scary proposition. It would be much easier to wait for your boss to make the decision and take the responsibility to tell you what to do and when to do it. However, progressive companies realize that they need employees at all levels who are willing and encouraged to take chances and to make decisions--and be willing to take responsibility for their actions.

Making Improvements: One of the easiest--and most effective--ways for employees to take initiative is to be on the lookout for ways to improve the work processes, products, services, and systems that are a vital part of how the organization does its business. In fact, the closer you are to an organization's actual product, the greater the chance is that you have more daily contact with its real business--its customers, clients, products, and services--than do those who are higher up the ladder.

Perseverance and Persistence: Employees who excel at taking initiative usually must also persist in the support of the ideas and actions in which they believe. This type of initiative can, at times, include overcoming the resistance of higher-ups or of entrenched policies and systems that work to ensure the maintenance of the status quo. It often takes a certain degree of courage to take initiative in the first place. But to persist--even over the objections of your manager or others--takes even more commitment and courage.

Taking initiative can be as simple as asking "what if." So, the next time you're doing a routine task, remember that it's the person who does the job who is in the best position to know how to do the job better--whether this improvement means identifying new ways to cut costs, how to make improvements to the way products are developed in your company, how a process might be streamlined, or how to enhance the level of services your customer receives.
[end quote]

---

More from the book:

"All progress is made in defiance of management." - Bob Woodward, Reporter, The Washington Post

"New ideas... are not born in a conforming environment." - Roger von Oech, President, Creative Think, Inc.

"Be Proactive, Not reactive.... Asking for forgiveness is easier than asking for permission. If you know what needs to be done, do it now and explain yourself later."

"Our people...are responsible for their own product and its quality. We expect them to act like owners." - Gordon Forward, President, Chaparral Steel

---

"The four cornerstones of character on which the structure of this nation was built are: Initiative, Imagination, Individuality and Independence."  - American war hero Eddie Riclenbacker. Do we have those to rebuild this nation? Ever wondered why despite all the new idealistic graduates that enter the Philippine bureaucracy each year, the bureaucracy remains the way it is - sluggish, bloated, stagnant, so full of itself? It is because the well entrenched bureaucracy does not understand what initiative is as pointed out by Nelson. The bureaucracy is too mindful of itself defending the status quo. To them the only initiative that matters is the initiative that preserves the present order. Inertia prevails. I call it INERTIATIVE - the readiness to preserve the current comfort level.

The fresh graduates brimming with idealism are slowly gnawed up by the system. They mature into zombies themselves gobbling up succeeding idealists that come. It is a vicious spiraling cycle with no end in sight unless we start to care and be heroes.

The Peter Principle proven

People who perform well at one level get be promoted on the assumption that they will also do well at another level. Common sense tells us so - a worker who is competent at a given level will also be competent at a higher level of the hierarchy. So it may well seem a good idea to promote such an individual to the next level. Or is it? The problem is that common sense can be counterintuitive. A new position requires different skills, thus the competence at one level may not necessarily mean equal competence in doing another task. We remember in Management 101 this seeming paradox known as Peter's Principle, after the Canadian psychologist Laurence Peter who succinctly described it thus:

"All new members in a hierarchical organization climb the hierarchy until they reach their level of maximum incompetence."

This could lead to the spread of incompetence throughout an organization. But is there a better way of choosing individuals for promotion?

Lately mathematical models are used to take into account collective behavior to discover features often counterintuitive and difficult to predict following the common sense. Scientists study the Peter Principle process within a general context where different promotion strategies compete with others for maximizing the global efficiency of a given hierarchical system.

Alessandro Pluchino, et al, Italian physicists/scientists, have simulated the Peter Principle practice with an agent-based model. Their results (02 July 2009), contained in a paper submitted to Elsevier Science, indicate that the Peter Principle indeed leads to a significant reduction in the efficiency of an organization, as incompetency spreads through it.

So is there a better way of choosing individuals for promotion? Pluchino and co. say there may be better ways.  Their model shows that two other strategies outperform the conventional method of promotion. One is to alternately promote first the most competent and then the least competent individuals. Another way is to promote individuals at random. Both of these methods improve, or at least do not diminish, the efficiency of an organization.

Their simulation showed that what Peter said in 1969 can happen. What the new study does not show is the potential decrease in morale (not just efficiency) due to the Peter Principle. The lower morale can have a multiplier effect in further bringing down efficiency. On the other hand, the study also did not take into account the possible decrease in overall morale if the competent ones are not promoted at all and if promotion was random or given to the least deserving. That defies the reward system and is heartless. As it is, promotions should be made regardless of the probable Peter Principle backlash. If and when the Peter Principle manifests itself, top management should be able to counteract. Top management surely does not want the Peter Principle to happen, but when it does, it must do something about it.

Five mistakes managers make most often

My guest blog, from TechRepublic:

Author: Toni Bowers
Some management mistakes are so common that you can actually compile them into a list. If you’re a manager struggling to find out why your team is dysfunctional, take a look at the behaviors in this list and see if any look familiar.

1. Not communicating with the team. I know, I know, you’ve seen the advice for communicating so often you want to smack someone. I want to smack myself for saying it so often. But you know what? Unless you’re on the front line heading into a military battle, you have to take time to communicate with your team members. You don’t have to pass on every shred of information you’ve gotten from upper management on a new initiative, but you have to give them enough information to know why they’re being asked to do what they’re being asked to do. The more information your team members have, the more ownership they’ll feel in the process, and the better they’ll perform.
2. Continually focusing on the negative. Thinking in negative terms is a common result from working in a reactive environment, which IT tends to be. In that environment, IT spends most of its time keeping the negative to a minimum with goals such as decreasing network downtime or putting out fires. A good leader has to make an effort to recognize the positive. (How about mentioning increased uptime?) Recognize your people for the forward progress they make and not just for their efforts to keep things from getting worse.
3. Changing policy due to one person. The term “team” makes some managers think they have to treat everyone the same way. This is true in many cases, but if one person has a performance issue, don’t take across-the-board measures to correct it just because you’re afraid of confronting that one team member. If one team member is failing to complete some duties in a timely manner, don’t introduce a policy forcing the whole team to submit weekly progress reports. Deal only with the one with the issues.
4. Not understanding the needs and concerns of your team. Some IT leaders find it virtually impossible to tell their bosses that something can’t be done. The team’s bandwidth or overall state of mind takes a backseat to real or imagined glory of being the guy who “gets things done.” Good managers don’t over-promise on their team’s behalf.
5. Never admitting you’re wrong or never taking responsibility. There’s risk involved in being a manager of a team. And that risk is, if your team fails at something, you should and will be the one held accountable. It doesn’t matter if one team member screwed something up; your job was to manage the overall process of all the team members, and you didn’t do it. So suck it up and own up to that. On a related note, if one of your actions caused a kink in a project, admit it. It’s ironic but not owning up to a problem damages your credibility with your team more than simply saying, “I was wrong.”

Is the world ready for the Filipino?

We often hear remarks about the Filipino that when we go abroad, we are very law abiding. Indeed, we know how to be successful abroad. We know how to follow rules - when in Rome, do as the Romans do.  Close to 10 million Filipinos are abroad. We are ever ready for the world. But is the world ready for us?

A Canadian school principal repeatedly disciplined Luc Cagadoc, a 7-year old Filipino boy, for eating in the customary Filipino manner with fork and spoon during lunch in school. In effect, the school principal wants the boy to "eat the way Canadians eat" because if he "eats like a pig he has to go to another table because this is the way we do it and how we’re going to do it every time."

What? These Canadians never heard of the word spoon-feeding? It means using spoon to feed. They'd be more grossed-out if they see him eat with his hands.

In another story, Amador Bernabe, a Filipino machine operator in Australia was fired because of the "tabo" scandal. He was fired over his habit of using water instead the usual toilet paper, like most Filipinos. Rich or poor, Pinoys invariably use the "tabo", the great equalizer. Bernabe's boss reprimanded him and threatened to fire him if he would not stop using water, and instead “follow the Australian way” (use toilet paper). When Bernabe wouldn’t back down, he was fired.

What again? These Australians don't know that using water is cleaner? I suppose if they take a bath by wiping themselves with toilet paper.

Filipinos are quick to adapt the new culture's way, except for the ingesting and for the excreting. But for all the others in between, the Filipino is ready for the world. The world better be ready for him because it takes awhile to get the Pinoy out of the Filipino.

Dealing with the insecurely paranoid

An old friend is still having some problems with his supervisors. Based on his description of his bosses, I say that they are an insecure bunch bordering on paranoia. I surfed the web for cases similar to his and this is what I sent him:

This is from the CareerKnowHow website:

Few Things are More Destructive Than an Insecure Boss
by Ramon Greenwood
Few things are more destructive to a career than a boss who is insecure. Unfortunately, it is a near certainty that most people will encounter one or more such persons along the way.
"The actions of an insecure boss will eventually create an insecure organization, riddled with anxiety and indecision," says Ramon Greenwood, senior career counselor at Common Sense At Work.com. "People will spend more time looking over their shoulders than looking ahead. Good defenses become more important than effective offenses."
Seven Traits Of An Insecure Boss
You will know your boss is suffering from an insecurity complex when he or she is engaging in behavior highlighted by these seven such traits:
1. The boss insists on absolute control over everything in the department. He rules with an iron hand, refusing to delegate any real authority. He doesn't trust anyone. He has few allies. Those allies he does enlist are formed into a tight little clique strongly obligated to his authority and dependent on it. They live an uncertain life on a short leash.
2. The boss constantly interferes in the work of his staff. Second guesses are the order of the day.
3. He constantly defends his position. Every question or hint of criticism is treated as a challenge to his worth and authority. He doubts he has the respect of his associates. Those who exhibit a mind of their own are under constant attack.
4. The insecure boss is most often an absolute perfectionist. He will climb the wall when you make a mistake. But look out. When he fouls up, he will blame it on someone else. He has to be right every time.
5. He will resist making decisions. This means endless studies and return trips to the drawing boards.
6. He will frequently remind you who is boss.
7. He finds it next to impossible to laugh at himself, but he is quick to laugh at others.
Seven Actions You Can Take
There are no certain quick fixes, but there are seven steps that will help mitigate the situation and advance your own interests. Actually, insecure bosses can offer opportunities.
1. Be certain you are not contributing to your superior's low self-esteem. Do everything you can to reassure him of your respect for his position and your commitment to helping him do his job.
2. Shore him up at every opportunity. Learn where he feels most insecure--where his hot buttons are--and make a special effort to be
helpful in these areas.
3. When you have to challenge him, and surely you will from time to time, be certain to do it in a positive way. Don't question his authority. Never challenge or criticize the boss in the presence of others.
4. Never go around your insecure boss to deal directly with his boss without explicit approval. Make sure he realizes that you clearly understand the hierarchical relationships. You don't want to become an endangered species because you are seen as questioning his judgement and appealing to higher authorities.
5. Always be sure he gets more than his fair share of credit for your good work. Stay one step behind him when the limelight shines.
6. Find some of his good points and acknowledge them, publicly as well as privately. Remember, your boss may be a pain in the neck to work with, but surely he must have some redeeming features worthy of compliments.
7. Think of your own insecurities and what helps you deal with them. Apply what you learn from this analysis to dealing with your insecure boss.

Work hard at working smart

A former boss, to whom I was not popular, often said (not to me) 'work smart, not hard'. Maybe it is just the only thing we agree about.

Many workers work hard, very hard. Not only work hard, but work hard for long hours. Never mind if mindless chatter intersperse the hours. Aside from chatter, many workers often work hard because they do not know exactly what they are doing, or the best way to do it, hence the inability to respond to the tasks accordingly. Some equate long hours with working hard. Of course, putting in long hours is hard work. Mahirap yun ha? However, if one has the option of working hard or smart, which would he rather do?

I've been working most of my life now. Majority of the working years were spent in government. One general problem in the bureaucracy is the tendency of management to equate long hours with working hard. In local labor lingo, the government bureaucracy works 'arawan', per day. Private business on the other hand, work 'pakyawan'. The irony there is whenever bureaucrats were to have something fixed in their house or car, for example, they invariably would want 'pakyaw' job orders.

Those coming from the private sector would find work in the layered bureaucracy sluggish, tedious and circuitous. The bureaucratic process trumps efficiency. Productivity is still unquestionably the desired outcome but efficiency is neglected. The bureaucracy will complete a job in 2 months if it can be completed in 2 weeks. That is the law of government planning. For example, the government projects an activity can be completed in X days, the government will then make plans and targets to complete the activity in X weeks, and then actually finish it in X months. Same X, longer unit. So, the next time you hear of a government output delivered in 3 months, more likely it was planned to be completed in 3 weeks, and could actually have been completed in 3 days.

A CEO blogs that the basic rule for success is responsiveness. This morning at the flag ceremony, our big boss talked of further improving our work. For starters, the government should start the crackdown on unresponsive units. It is time to get the bureaucracy out of its inertia.