Found it on Facebook

Actually, a friend found it on Facebook for me, but I’m not proud.  I’ll take it:

Obama Shinseki and a Marine

I’ve heard that Shinseki is an honorable man. That may be true but, sadly, he’s proven himself to be a terrible manager — and, in the job he accepted, managerial skill and honor go together.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. says

    Exactly so.
     
    It’s sad that this will be his legacy – he took a job for which he was not suited.  And when it became clear that he wasn’t suited, and people were being harmed because he couldn’t do the job, he did not resign and let those in charge know what the problems were.  
     
    He stayed on, for whatever reasons, and people died as a result.

  2. says

    Shinseki’s 300-400k troop requirement for Iraq is an example of a bureaucrat, some skinless, riskless, person who can’t get more done with less. He wants more and more resources, and when he gets it in the VA, most of it goes into union “bonuses” at the expense of 115 waiting days for vets.
     
    That’s Shinseki. If he hadn’t gotten to America and been given an American name, his Japanese ancestors would call for his taking responsibility right now via hanging.

  3. Caped Crusader says

    Upper level generals ARE plan managers and little else, since high level military planning and tactics are nothing but that. Logistics, logistics, logistics, and nothing but logistics. What is necessary to complete the mission, how many will it take, what will they need, how do we get it here when needed, how quickly can we get it done, and what will be the consequences, and further actions that might be necessary; ad infinitum.

  4. says

    Would an honorable person serve under a President that’s intentionally sabotaging Iraq and Afghanistan’s tactical victories won under Bush?
     
    Petraeus certainly didn’t last as long S here.

  5. lee says

    I flushed the years of my life (and too friggin’ much money) in grad school studying literature. By the time I got to grad school, it was no longer about studying literature as it was about studying “literary theory and criticism.” Aristotle’s “Poetics” was derided. ThePoMo thing was big. And I think PoMo had taken over the US. Gender is an artificial construct. You can pretty much make anything mean what you want it to mean–there is no inherent meaning our truth to anything. Truth is relative; there is no objective truth. Also beauty and morality are relative; there is no objective beauty and there is no objective morality. All cultures and histories are valid and to be respected (except American culture and history–that is one of repression.) 
     
    This was just what I was getting in grad school, studying literature. Reading Judith Butler, Lacan, Adorno, Barthes, Horkheimer, Bhabha, Derrida… How did crappy self indulgent writers come to ruin ALL our lives?

  6. Seanroconnor says

    Early on in my civilian career I sat in a meeting with my boss and my boss’ boss (who was the CEO of the small company) and watched in amazement as my boss flat out LIED to the CEO!  And the CEO bought it.
    Having come from the submarine force where telling the truth (no matter how painful) was expected behavior, this came as somewhat as a rude surprise….not that someone would lie, but that the CEO bought it without any sort of questioning attitude when contrary evidence was staring him right in his face!  I made a promise to myself never to get so high in the organization that I was so divorced from reality that I did not know what was happening at the deck plate level.
    The solution here is simple.  Someone needs to be put in place with a flamethrower and given clear guidance and support to change the culture.  The bonus situation has been warped out of reality to encourage lying – end the bonus structure until you can correct the behavior (i.e. – when in a hole, stop digging…).  Use the flamethrower approach to fire/retire/let-go/marginalize/shame everyone who is standing in your way..
    If I didn’t know any better I would swear that the kind of person you need is someone with experience buying run down companies and turning them around….where could we find someone like that on the national level??
     

  7. says

    Shinseki’s problem is that he isn’t able to tell his superiors things that they don’t want to hear.  
     
    It is not possible that he was ignorant of what was happening, but to have made it public would have been to make himself the skunk at the wedding party, and he didn’t have the sense of personal honor and accountability to do that.  
     
    Truth-telling is dangerous….when the bureaucracy becomes as sclerotic as it is in our government, no one who is a truth-teller is going to advance.  S/he will have been weeded out long before arriving in a top leadership position.  
     
    Seanroconnor is correct – the only solution is someone with a flamethrower.

  8. says

    “Shinseki’s problem is that he isn’t able to tell his superiors things that they don’t want to hear.  ”
     
    And Shinseki telling RUmsfield his troop numbers were incompetent was due to…

  9. Danny Lemieux says

    “Shinseki’s problem is that he isn’t able to tell his superiors things that they don’t want to hear.”
    Then, the only honorable solution is to resign! The fact that he didn’t until he was called out only makes it worse.
     

Leave a Reply