From: Louis Krupp on
docdwarf(a) wrote:
> In article <7rrufgFb9jU1(a)>,
> Pete Dashwood <dashwood(a)> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Our Civil Servants are paid above the average for the same job in the
>> private sector. We don't (generally) seem to have any better service from
>> them. (Mind you, we can't know how bad things would be if we paid them
>> less... :-))
> I recently came across a Civil Service agency's self-assesment document...
> a dozen-or-so pages of questions, each to be answered with a filled-in
> circle next to
> Disagree Strongly
> Disagree Slightly
> Neither Agree or (sic) Disagree
> Agree Slightly
> Agree Strongly
> ... and then the results were sliced, diced and reorganised by an
> Independent External Consulting Agency.
> The first page or two, of course, had all the high scores... '87.5% of the
> respondents Strongly Agreed that their workplaces were well-lit! 84%
> Agreed Strongly or Agreed Slightly that the carpet-color did not make them
> feel ill!'
> Being who/what I am - when I get a retail-catalogue I always read it
> back-to-front - I turned to the back pages and found saddening numbers.
> 'Are rewards and recognitions distributed in your agency according to
> merit? Strongly Disagree - 78%' 'Is your Management is open to new ideas
> or suggestions? Strongly disagree - 74%' 'Does your Organisation have
> clear mechanisms and procedures for resolving workplace disagreements?
> Strongly disagree - 72%'
> In other words... generously giving a Passing Grade of 65%, discounting
> the 'Neither Agree nor Disagee' answers and totalling/averaging the rest
> the Organisation failed miserably.
> Now... it is possible that the exact same thing might be true in a
> private-sector organisation of similar function, I do not have the data to
> compare. I assume, however, that the private-sector would need to have
> things working smoothly enough to generate a profit.

"Smoothly enough" to keep owners or shareholders happy is probably more
accurate, and things can be very rough for a lot of people for a long
time before someone notices an effect on the bottom line.