[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]

00857: Re: [WDDM] Re: decisions at wider levels

From: Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 16:32:39 +1000
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Re: decisions at wider levels

Richard,

An example may answer your question.

Perhaps you can explain how in this case you would find an easy
consensus to replace the reform efforts which you find a total waste:

The premier of Queensland State is appointed to lead his party which
won a majority at the last state election. He is told by an aluminium
refinery manager that the refinery will be downgraded and hand over
most of its production to an affiliated company in Malaysia unless
Queensland can give the company a controlling interest in the state's
principal electric power producer which determines bulk electricity
supply tariffs. The premier has been criticized by the state's
parliamentary opposition for environmental pollution concessions to
the corporation. He decides to construct a consensus by negotiating
with the Malaysian government and Malaysian corporation and the chief
clients and suppliers, trades unions, evironmental and other concerned
organizations, which in turn involves input from other countries. The
corporaion imposes an utlimatum: unless a decision is positive within 6
months the downsizing of the Queensland operation will start and the
city of Gladstone which supplies most of the work force for aluminium
production and electricity generation will face the likelihood of
becoming a ghost town. The next state election is 18 months away and
voters are divided among those favoring appeasement of the corporation
and those advising to buy out the Malaysian operation with taxpayers'
funds. Minorities have various alternative proposals, e.g. one
proposing to bring in cheap labor from Malaysia to make the Queensland
operation more competitive. Another group calls for closing down the
refinery as a polluting luxury, then dissolving the state parliament
and handing over the state's administration to local civic councils.
The premier decides to place his decision in the hands of a consensus
of everyone affected including his opposition but his party deposes him
because his consensus can never be reached before the 18 months'
company ultimatum and election. Question: Should he contest the next
election on a consensus-pursing platform as an independent candidate,
or quit politics and start a horticultural cooperative, or what? He
hypothetically lives in the real world, not a local utopia.
-- Doug
===

hdr00857-tiff.gif

Doug Everingham wrote:

I agree that decision making should solve a problem in each case.

However, some problems are hard or impossible to solve by consensus.

I would be interested in proposals to reform existing authorities,
legal systems and / or management systems to improve their processes.

What is your evidence that problems are more difficult to solve by
consensus processes?

You can pursue reform if you want to, but it's a total waste of time in
today's world.

rkm

[Prev] [Next]   [Index]   [Thread Index]