Unfortunately, when the people:
- don't know what they are supposed to do, or
- have the wrong understanding of what they are supposed to do,
creating the conditions in which they can succeed in achieving what they are supposed to do merely causes mayhem.
It isn't helped if the CEO, too, doesn't know or has the wrong understanding of what the organisation is supposed to do.
CASA AVMED is the classic example - mostly people labouring under the misapprehension that what they are supposed to do is impose their pet theories and projects on the aviation community, while labouring under the misapprehension that they're not doing more damage than good. It's been left to create this mayhem by CEOs without much of an idea about what AVMED is supposed to do.
Airservices seems to me to be an organisation in which the professional air traffic controllers simply do their best to survive and provide the best service they can, despite the circus at executive level. Staib didn't have a chance. It was obvious from the first Senate Committee hearing. Not so much because it was clear that she was abysmally briefed, but more because it was clear that her executive had made a deliberate decision to leave her exposed. And it subsequently became clear that embarrassing Staib was about the only matter on which the executive was united.
The problem with putting senior ADF officers in these positions is that ADF officers come from a background in which the people around them are generally loyal, genuinely respectful and generally committed to supporting each other to achieve a common and altruistic goal. It doesn't work when you expect them to, for example, "lead" a bunch of self-interested, back-stabbing sociopaths and narcissists. Just doesn't work. They won't be lead. They're not motivated by the things that motivate the people in the ADF. Venus/Mars stuff.