In retrospect, I got a bit over-excited about new growth this morning, in sacking the leadership team. So after I'd calmed down, I instead restructured the Druidic Executive and gave them radically new - and yet excitingly similar - responsibilities to their old ones. So instead of being responsible for "Godly Order and Discipline", Hnaef's new responsibilities now comprise "Discipline and Godly Order". While Burton's ambit has moved from "Finance, IT Security and Governance" to "Governance, Finance and IT Security."
Trouble is, in my newly mollified state, I also gave them the right to appoint sub-committees to carry out specific trouble-shooting or process improvement tasks. And Hnaef and Burton both (correctly, as it turned out) identified an area where their responsibilities overlapped, and spotted the dangers that might lay therein of wasted time and energy. Naturally, they both decided to do something about it.
Cut a long story short, we now have two task-forces dedicated to eliminating the duplication of effort.
Sometimes I despair.
Now I like the Committee system, but not when it complicates matters. Much better an autocratic rule, where people are advisers or Courtiers so to speak.
ReplyDeleteYou give each one overlapping responsibilities which ends up with duplication of effort, internecine argument and with so much going on, nobody has the time to plot your downfall.
And as the Corporals in the Army are the ones who get things done, shout at people and generally ensure that it all works, I'd appoint a tiny Corps of Corporals to work at the shop floor level to beast people into submission until everything is done. And as they are autonomous of the Advisers or Courtiers and report directly to the leader, you have perfect rule.
Give the Corporals lots of beer, feed them lots of people to shout at and they are your loyal servants for life.