No disrespect intended here for Dick, but he stood very little chance of making the necessary changes, particularly when the Iron Circle found out that Dick was actually interested in making a change for the better. And yes, the foundations of the Iron Circle remained intact when Dick started at the CAA, and a new breed with additional members have since been trained and mentored to cohabit in the realm their forefathers left them.
I've read (in Organisational development papers) that in order to make sustain cultural organisational change you need to change 1/3 of the management. This seems about right in my experience.
The trouble with government bodies like CASA is that we change the guy at the top; make it very hard for him to change the two levels below him but expect that changing one guy at the top will fix everything.
Without knowing any of the personalities involved, its pretty clear that CASA's problems start with the board. It needs a new board with more board members, more aviation experience, more regulatory body experience and more diverse experience and LESS LAWYERS (if the only tool you have is a hammer, everything you see looks like a nail).
In my experience in turnaround situations nearly all the people reporting to the CEO have to go. There might be one good guy, but they will be entrenched in the old ways. Its the third level which usually has some good guys frustrated by the two levels above them, but there will be some guys need to go at this level too.
What are the chances that any government will restructure a board, change CEO's then allow him to (one way or another) dismiss maybe 8 senior managers?
Meanwhile the hamster wheel does another lap.