A current favourite is a poem by Kipling called the Gods of the Copybook Headings. This argues that the old sayings have stood the test of time and are much better guides than following the call of the market: Kipling in his reactionary phase, perhaps.
It contains some wonderful lines which are so appropriate for some of the funding bodies, agencies and bureaucracies with which we deal. The best is the verse:
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
How often we are told the obvious as if it were some new discovery ...
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
How could we possibly think that bureaucrats were 'lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind ...'?
Unheard of. They have lists of boxes that need ticking.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place ...
Good customer-responsive stuff then. Or try:
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch ...
By now you should be beginning to say yeeeees! ...
Love the lines; we just wish Kipling's conclusion was not so backward-looking.
Monday, 23 September 2013
Monday, 19 August 2013
Belbin strikes back ...
... or the rise of the Monitor/Evaluator.
We have just been reading through a thrilling 340 page document called a Business Survival Toolkit. This includes some 69 different rather 'tools' for business planning drawing largely on the works of various academics. For those of us who have been around a bit, it is notable that few of the basics have changes much from the work of the great business thinkers of the post-War generation: people like Hawthorne, Herzberg and Maslow whose work was so able summarised by people like Charles Handy and others. A new generation must have its say, however (Smith & Jones 2013).
Somewhere deep inside this riveting document is a quotation from someone called Richard Piper of the NCVO (National Council of Voluntary Organisations). He says:
Some people in our sector concentrate more on the technical problem of measuring outcomes, and less on the strategic problem of achieving them. This is a disease, an affliction, and we can call it measurement anxiety. It can paralyse us and it seems to be contagious.
It goes on to describe an exercise in which he asked 50 people to word associate with 'outcomes' and 48 of them mentioned something about assessment or measurement.
Now this is interesting for three reasons. The easy one is that we all know it has happened and has become endemic over the last twenty years leading to paralysis of action. The word Ofsted is enough to send quivers through any teacher's bloodstream as Accreditation should in the Museum world: inspection and measurement by those who can't of those who can and are doing their damnedest to do better.
We have mentioned before Einstein's remark that Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. This should be written over every Monitor/Evaluator's desk.
The second is that someone is brave enough to say it out loud, knowing that a whole cohort of assessors will round on him from a great height and claim that they are absolutely convinced that achieving objectives is the Most Important thing and that their systems are designed to be Entirely Helpful... a this will hurt me much more than it hurts you response.
The third is that he seems to have been quoted as saying it and this suggests that the report writers approve of what he is saying. This is a document of 340 pages almost wholly given over to the thoughts of academics setting out the 'best practice' way of doing things which, you guessed it, include lots and lots of monitoring and evaluation. And being the work of academics even the most banal or self-evident remark is referenced (Smith & Robinson 2013) but that is a topic for another time (Mumblings, date to be announced).
Every Belbin group needs its different role-players, even including Monitor/Evaluators, but when they start to impose their vision of how business should be done, acting as judge and jury, we do feel inclined to agree with the old ladies in Arsenic and Old Lace, that they would be much happier with a nice dose of elderflower cordial which, you may recall, contained something less harmless to end the existence of those who were lonely or did not have a fulfilling life. It would do wonders for this particular disease or affliction.
We have just been reading through a thrilling 340 page document called a Business Survival Toolkit. This includes some 69 different rather 'tools' for business planning drawing largely on the works of various academics. For those of us who have been around a bit, it is notable that few of the basics have changes much from the work of the great business thinkers of the post-War generation: people like Hawthorne, Herzberg and Maslow whose work was so able summarised by people like Charles Handy and others. A new generation must have its say, however (Smith & Jones 2013).
Somewhere deep inside this riveting document is a quotation from someone called Richard Piper of the NCVO (National Council of Voluntary Organisations). He says:
Some people in our sector concentrate more on the technical problem of measuring outcomes, and less on the strategic problem of achieving them. This is a disease, an affliction, and we can call it measurement anxiety. It can paralyse us and it seems to be contagious.
It goes on to describe an exercise in which he asked 50 people to word associate with 'outcomes' and 48 of them mentioned something about assessment or measurement.
Now this is interesting for three reasons. The easy one is that we all know it has happened and has become endemic over the last twenty years leading to paralysis of action. The word Ofsted is enough to send quivers through any teacher's bloodstream as Accreditation should in the Museum world: inspection and measurement by those who can't of those who can and are doing their damnedest to do better.
We have mentioned before Einstein's remark that Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted. This should be written over every Monitor/Evaluator's desk.
The second is that someone is brave enough to say it out loud, knowing that a whole cohort of assessors will round on him from a great height and claim that they are absolutely convinced that achieving objectives is the Most Important thing and that their systems are designed to be Entirely Helpful... a this will hurt me much more than it hurts you response.
The third is that he seems to have been quoted as saying it and this suggests that the report writers approve of what he is saying. This is a document of 340 pages almost wholly given over to the thoughts of academics setting out the 'best practice' way of doing things which, you guessed it, include lots and lots of monitoring and evaluation. And being the work of academics even the most banal or self-evident remark is referenced (Smith & Robinson 2013) but that is a topic for another time (Mumblings, date to be announced).
Every Belbin group needs its different role-players, even including Monitor/Evaluators, but when they start to impose their vision of how business should be done, acting as judge and jury, we do feel inclined to agree with the old ladies in Arsenic and Old Lace, that they would be much happier with a nice dose of elderflower cordial which, you may recall, contained something less harmless to end the existence of those who were lonely or did not have a fulfilling life. It would do wonders for this particular disease or affliction.
Friday, 9 August 2013
Who are you?
We have just had one of those delightful conversations with an insurance company. It went along the following lines:
Me: Hello, I would like to cancel my insurance policy and receive its surrender value.
Them: Can I just confirm your identity: what is your policy number?
Me: [reads out the number]
Them: What is the first line of your address?
Me: [gives it]
Them: What is your date of birth?
Me: [gives it]
Them: When did you start this policy?
Me: (reading from a letter they recently sent me) February 1988
Them: How much have you been paying monthly?
Me: I think it is about £18 a month
Them: OK, I shall send you a form to close the thing down … we will need evidence of identity for both you and your wife.
Me (thinks): So you have been taking £18 a month off us for over 25 years and only now, when we want OUR money back, do you even think to ask us to prove who we are. What if we had been funding this policy by some criminal activity all these years?
Me: Hello, I would like to cancel my insurance policy and receive its surrender value.
Them: Can I just confirm your identity: what is your policy number?
Me: [reads out the number]
Them: What is the first line of your address?
Me: [gives it]
Them: What is your date of birth?
Me: [gives it]
Them: When did you start this policy?
Me: (reading from a letter they recently sent me) February 1988
Them: How much have you been paying monthly?
Me: I think it is about £18 a month
Them: OK, I shall send you a form to close the thing down … we will need evidence of identity for both you and your wife.
Me (thinks): So you have been taking £18 a month off us for over 25 years and only now, when we want OUR money back, do you even think to ask us to prove who we are. What if we had been funding this policy by some criminal activity all these years?
Thursday, 8 August 2013
Cold calling letter
We received a letter this week from a company with whom we have not done business who claim to be 'Winning Contracts for [County]'. They presumably want our business. Why do we feel an instinctive desire to put it straight in the bin?
I am writing to tell you about a new project supporting the social economy and to invite you to participate in a survey that will help us to tailor this and future projects to your needs. (So I fill in a survey which allows you to tailor your products ... about which I so far know nothing ... to which of my needs?).
[Our scheme] is a project that aims to increase the number and size of contracts being won by social enterprises in [county] by facilitating business development, collaboration and engagement of potential product and service buyers. (Nothing like a good bit of facilitating ... it's those fleas again)
We are conducting a survey to identify the drivers and barriers for growth and scaling up of social enterprises in the area. The results of the study will enable us all to understand where to focus resources to benefit enterprises like yours ...
If you are interested in winning new or bigger contracts for your enterprise - or engaging with prime contractors of services - we would love to help ... (And your knowledge, expertise, experience and understanding of our sector is what?)
Are you any the wiser as to what they are offering and why we might be tempted to waste time on their survey?
No 1 file, I think.
I am writing to tell you about a new project supporting the social economy and to invite you to participate in a survey that will help us to tailor this and future projects to your needs. (So I fill in a survey which allows you to tailor your products ... about which I so far know nothing ... to which of my needs?).
[Our scheme] is a project that aims to increase the number and size of contracts being won by social enterprises in [county] by facilitating business development, collaboration and engagement of potential product and service buyers. (Nothing like a good bit of facilitating ... it's those fleas again)
We are conducting a survey to identify the drivers and barriers for growth and scaling up of social enterprises in the area. The results of the study will enable us all to understand where to focus resources to benefit enterprises like yours ...
If you are interested in winning new or bigger contracts for your enterprise - or engaging with prime contractors of services - we would love to help ... (And your knowledge, expertise, experience and understanding of our sector is what?)
Are you any the wiser as to what they are offering and why we might be tempted to waste time on their survey?
No 1 file, I think.
Sunday, 28 July 2013
Colne valley sculpture trail
What a gem: someone has produced a leaflet on a sculpture trail of artistic interventions.
The leaflet details the real life route of a three mile walk featuring 12 highlights such as an abandoned bath in a field, a derelict house and a collapsed wall, which have been attributed to fictional artists.
The abandoned bath is supposedly a piece called Wash Behind the Ears and is described as dealing with the "contradictory concepts of filth and cleanliness, typically by placing a familiar bathroom item in a countryside setting".
See more on the BBC website
The leaflet details the real life route of a three mile walk featuring 12 highlights such as an abandoned bath in a field, a derelict house and a collapsed wall, which have been attributed to fictional artists.
The abandoned bath is supposedly a piece called Wash Behind the Ears and is described as dealing with the "contradictory concepts of filth and cleanliness, typically by placing a familiar bathroom item in a countryside setting".
See more on the BBC website
Tuesday, 18 June 2013
'Popular Northern museums must stay open'
The Director of the Science Museum has suggested that, if budget cuts continue, he may be faced with the very real possibility of having to close one or more of his museum's outside London as he will be unable to continue with the commitment to allowing free entry. While this is a useful public negotiating tactic to avoid his budget being cut, it has predictably caused a storm of protest. The following letter appeared in the Times of 15 June.
Sir, We are former directors of the national museums currently under threat of possible closure because of budget problems within the parent organisation - the Science Museum Group. we believe there are powerful reasons why the National Media Museum (Bradford), National Railway Museum (York and Shildon) and the Museum of Science and Industry (Manchester) must stay open.
First, all are success stories. They hold collections of genuine international significance, have expertise which is respected worldwide, and are immensely popular - with more than two million visitors a year.
Secondly, they are vital in their host cities, providing cultural, educational and economic benefit across the regions. All three are crucial components of their local and regional economies, attracting tourists and prestige, and supporting jobs.
Third, and most importantly, they are examples of an important egalitarian principle - that the benefits of tax revenue gathered nationally should be spread nationally. Everyone from Islington to Inverness and from Camden to Camborne pays taxes and it is morally and politically right that the benefits of that tax revenue should be spread as far as possible around the country. The BBC has demonstrated this by the excellent move of a large part of its operation from London to Salford, spreading more of its economic impact outside the M25. Surely, at least some of our national museums should operate on the same principle?
Although the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) describes the issue as merely an operational matter for the Science Museum Trustees, the Government cannot shirk its responsibility. Party manifestos spoke of the right of free access to our national heritage but it is an empty right if the museum concerned has closed. To insist on further deep budget cuts and to maintain a policy of free entry, even though free entry might be a good idea in principle, feels like an untenable position.
Moreover, the Secretary of State has responsibility for tourism. What organisation charged with enhancing our national income from tourists can regard the closure of one of the North of England's greater visitors attractions as a sensible way out of recession?
We urge the trustees of the Science Museum Group and DCMS to consider the track record and value of museums in the North of England and to ensure that a solution is found to enable them all to stay open.
Signed by Colin Ford, Patrick Greene, Colin Philpott, Andrew Scott
But for some lingering doubt about the level of tax paid by the residents of Camborne, well said!
Sir, We are former directors of the national museums currently under threat of possible closure because of budget problems within the parent organisation - the Science Museum Group. we believe there are powerful reasons why the National Media Museum (Bradford), National Railway Museum (York and Shildon) and the Museum of Science and Industry (Manchester) must stay open.
First, all are success stories. They hold collections of genuine international significance, have expertise which is respected worldwide, and are immensely popular - with more than two million visitors a year.
Secondly, they are vital in their host cities, providing cultural, educational and economic benefit across the regions. All three are crucial components of their local and regional economies, attracting tourists and prestige, and supporting jobs.
Third, and most importantly, they are examples of an important egalitarian principle - that the benefits of tax revenue gathered nationally should be spread nationally. Everyone from Islington to Inverness and from Camden to Camborne pays taxes and it is morally and politically right that the benefits of that tax revenue should be spread as far as possible around the country. The BBC has demonstrated this by the excellent move of a large part of its operation from London to Salford, spreading more of its economic impact outside the M25. Surely, at least some of our national museums should operate on the same principle?
Although the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) describes the issue as merely an operational matter for the Science Museum Trustees, the Government cannot shirk its responsibility. Party manifestos spoke of the right of free access to our national heritage but it is an empty right if the museum concerned has closed. To insist on further deep budget cuts and to maintain a policy of free entry, even though free entry might be a good idea in principle, feels like an untenable position.
Moreover, the Secretary of State has responsibility for tourism. What organisation charged with enhancing our national income from tourists can regard the closure of one of the North of England's greater visitors attractions as a sensible way out of recession?
We urge the trustees of the Science Museum Group and DCMS to consider the track record and value of museums in the North of England and to ensure that a solution is found to enable them all to stay open.
Signed by Colin Ford, Patrick Greene, Colin Philpott, Andrew Scott
But for some lingering doubt about the level of tax paid by the residents of Camborne, well said!
Saying it as it is
Just occasionally we trip over someone saying just what we are feeling. This time it was Selina Scott who launched into the Heritage Lottery Fund at a reception in Yorkshire: What the Dickens! Selina Scott in novel row.
It was good to see such an articulate speaker highlighting the insulting and unhelpful adult-child mindset at the core of that organisation. Did anyone consider the heritage instead of whether the bid had been 'impressive' or not?
Oh to have been a fly on the wall.
PS: we have been a bit quiet recently: not through lack of ideas, simply lack of time. More follows soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)