Airservices CEO Resigns
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, Porter, I could equally argue that someone, other than ex-RAAF, might, and I emphasize might, just allow themselves to be influenced by personal prejudice and cause total chaos and division in an industry that can ill-afford it.
Whatever you do, don't mention NAS. I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.
Whatever you do, don't mention NAS. I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sen. Heffernan told her months ago that she needed a 'clean out' at executive level, and she chose to ignore the advice. The 'boys club' had their way in the end.
At least Harfields 'interim' secondment means he wont get the (much desired) position in the end. SDE anyone? Great advice!!
p.s Sunfish, Staib at least stood her ground. Look at the number of EGMs that Greg Russell sacked..He employed them.
At least Harfields 'interim' secondment means he wont get the (much desired) position in the end. SDE anyone? Great advice!!
p.s Sunfish, Staib at least stood her ground. Look at the number of EGMs that Greg Russell sacked..He employed them.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harfield, spare me, and all the other useless dead****s that floor walk in Canberra. If the airlines knew the calibre or credentials of the idiots running ASA they'd refuse to pay their bills. And they'd be justified. All the little empires & kingdoms that have been built in the joint would surprise the most cynical.
Paragraph:
Since all the participants are mostly dead I think I can tell this story, even if it is off topic and there is no suggestion its related to events at Airservices or anywhere else. I was a small cog in this story which is quite short. There were Three of us involved.
After Don gave up South Australian politics, he moved to Victoria to take up public office (which in my opinion he still hankered for) as Director of Tourism for the Cain Labor Victorian Government in 1982. He had a Board, and a budget, to assist him and their mission, was to revitalise the Victorian tourism industry.
Around late 1985 Don had the feeling that "things weren't going to plan" in the Victorian tourist industry and to his credit, he hired a major management consulting firm to find out what was going on. Two of our people started an interview and data gathering process.
After about a month they came to see me in my corporate strategy cubicle and over a cuppa they said words to the effect:"look Sunfish, what do we do? We have found the source of the problems……and it's Don! The bloke who is paying us". I thought for a while, consulted my crystal ball, looked at the tea leaves and made a suggestion: "This is a rather delicate problem fellas". Says I, "lets have a word in private with the Premiers Chief of Staff".
So we arranged to have a quiet word with Cains Chief of Staff (whose name now escapes me) and laid out our problem - including the fact that we had agreed to give a draft report to Don for comment. Chief of Staff solved our problem for us : "OK boys! From now on you are working for me!".
What we had found in Tourism Victoria was that quite simply Don was "too big" and too "hands on" for the position. The Board had entirely abrogated its responsibilities to Don. Everything was going to be done his way or the highway. The staff were completely demoralised and perhaps most importantly, Tourism Victoria, and by definition Don, had completely lost the trust of the Victorian Tourism industry with predictable economic results. There was no malice or stupidity involved, as a former successful Premier, Don just couldn't help himself and his "style" didn't bring people along with him.
We dutifully prepared a draft report, which I proofread many times and submitted it to Don for comment. We had already told him that the Premier, not Tourism Victoria, was paying our bill and that the final report would go to the Premier. Don's comment: "Fellas, if this gets out I won't hold public office ever again".
We made Three copies of the final report, one for our safe, One for Don and One for the Premier.
I was told that John Cain simply rang Don and said words to the effect that: " Mate, I have this report, but I haven't read it, if you were to decide to resign I wouldn't need to read it because it would be irrelevant." Don dutifully resigned for personal or other reasons and that was that.
I was pestered by some senior public servants for the report or its details for a few months. They knew it existed but that was all. I think I can tell this story now as the Thirty year rule should apply.
Draw conclusions about the wisdom and potential pitfalls of senior people from one walk of life jumping into another if you will, success is not assured. I know that whenever I hear of some great and good person stepping into another career, I think of poor Don.
I note that you make reference to Don Dunstan. I just hope you weren't part of his little group down there mate, if you get my point?
After Don gave up South Australian politics, he moved to Victoria to take up public office (which in my opinion he still hankered for) as Director of Tourism for the Cain Labor Victorian Government in 1982. He had a Board, and a budget, to assist him and their mission, was to revitalise the Victorian tourism industry.
Around late 1985 Don had the feeling that "things weren't going to plan" in the Victorian tourist industry and to his credit, he hired a major management consulting firm to find out what was going on. Two of our people started an interview and data gathering process.
After about a month they came to see me in my corporate strategy cubicle and over a cuppa they said words to the effect:"look Sunfish, what do we do? We have found the source of the problems……and it's Don! The bloke who is paying us". I thought for a while, consulted my crystal ball, looked at the tea leaves and made a suggestion: "This is a rather delicate problem fellas". Says I, "lets have a word in private with the Premiers Chief of Staff".
So we arranged to have a quiet word with Cains Chief of Staff (whose name now escapes me) and laid out our problem - including the fact that we had agreed to give a draft report to Don for comment. Chief of Staff solved our problem for us : "OK boys! From now on you are working for me!".
What we had found in Tourism Victoria was that quite simply Don was "too big" and too "hands on" for the position. The Board had entirely abrogated its responsibilities to Don. Everything was going to be done his way or the highway. The staff were completely demoralised and perhaps most importantly, Tourism Victoria, and by definition Don, had completely lost the trust of the Victorian Tourism industry with predictable economic results. There was no malice or stupidity involved, as a former successful Premier, Don just couldn't help himself and his "style" didn't bring people along with him.
We dutifully prepared a draft report, which I proofread many times and submitted it to Don for comment. We had already told him that the Premier, not Tourism Victoria, was paying our bill and that the final report would go to the Premier. Don's comment: "Fellas, if this gets out I won't hold public office ever again".
We made Three copies of the final report, one for our safe, One for Don and One for the Premier.
I was told that John Cain simply rang Don and said words to the effect that: " Mate, I have this report, but I haven't read it, if you were to decide to resign I wouldn't need to read it because it would be irrelevant." Don dutifully resigned for personal or other reasons and that was that.
I was pestered by some senior public servants for the report or its details for a few months. They knew it existed but that was all. I think I can tell this story now as the Thirty year rule should apply.
Draw conclusions about the wisdom and potential pitfalls of senior people from one walk of life jumping into another if you will, success is not assured. I know that whenever I hear of some great and good person stepping into another career, I think of poor Don.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bamboozled by the implication, Porter; can't quite make the connection. Are you suggesting that National Defence should be run as a 'business?' You've got me on that one. And that does not mean that I disagree as regards competence.
To wit, Hempy and SDE. What a total crock. On my side of the fence, we fell around laughing at the abject stupidity and the way it was swallowed - we genuinely felt sorry for you guys. I remember going to a few meetings and watching bosses, with no aviation grounding, grasping the concept as if it was being delivered as the 'Holy Grail.'
Que to Azervicestan and coffee-flavoured coffee, plus the shiny suits.
No names, but the mob that were then there, and are still now, have nothing more than a few years on enroute before scuttling off to the protection of management jobs. On the other hand, thank Christo for that. I'd hate to be SLF if these guys were doing APP.
Sunny, stop shoveling. The reference to Donny is loose at best.
To wit, Hempy and SDE. What a total crock. On my side of the fence, we fell around laughing at the abject stupidity and the way it was swallowed - we genuinely felt sorry for you guys. I remember going to a few meetings and watching bosses, with no aviation grounding, grasping the concept as if it was being delivered as the 'Holy Grail.'
Que to Azervicestan and coffee-flavoured coffee, plus the shiny suits.
No names, but the mob that were then there, and are still now, have nothing more than a few years on enroute before scuttling off to the protection of management jobs. On the other hand, thank Christo for that. I'd hate to be SLF if these guys were doing APP.
Sunny, stop shoveling. The reference to Donny is loose at best.
That sounds like a statement that should follow, but it doesn't.
Disclaimer: I'm not saying working in an upper level defence post makes you fit for running anything, and it beats me how some people get up the ladder. However ...
Ex-RAAF can and do run businesses, and (for the right individuals) their higher level defence work makes them pretty good candidates for other top jobs.
The budgets they have had to manage are far from limitless, the people they lead do not simply jump to obey, they need to know how to work in and provide direction for large and complex organisations.
Generalising about this stuff isn't appropriate. I've raised the question before about what is the right breeding ground for people to fill these kinds of senior post, without suggesting that ex-military is the only way to go. It's one obvious route, but what are the others? Small business owners would probably be out of their depth, and yes, some ex-military aren't suitable either, but don't tar everyone with the same brush.
Disclaimer: I'm not saying working in an upper level defence post makes you fit for running anything, and it beats me how some people get up the ladder. However ...
Ex-RAAF can and do run businesses, and (for the right individuals) their higher level defence work makes them pretty good candidates for other top jobs.
The budgets they have had to manage are far from limitless, the people they lead do not simply jump to obey, they need to know how to work in and provide direction for large and complex organisations.
Generalising about this stuff isn't appropriate. I've raised the question before about what is the right breeding ground for people to fill these kinds of senior post, without suggesting that ex-military is the only way to go. It's one obvious route, but what are the others? Small business owners would probably be out of their depth, and yes, some ex-military aren't suitable either, but don't tar everyone with the same brush.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At board/CEO level, it's not the 'experience' (RAAF vs civil) that counts so much as the qualities of the individual. Sadly, it would seem, in this great land those qualities diminish the further up the food chain one manges to accomplish.
There was an ex CEO of Air NZ who, before his time, put it all reasonably succinctly..
"I don't need to look after the Government, the Board, the shareholders or my customers. I just need to look after my staff. If I do that properly the rest will look after itself".
1990's US management practice is still alive and well in Aus. We'll learn one day
There was an ex CEO of Air NZ who, before his time, put it all reasonably succinctly..
"I don't need to look after the Government, the Board, the shareholders or my customers. I just need to look after my staff. If I do that properly the rest will look after itself".
1990's US management practice is still alive and well in Aus. We'll learn one day
Sir Angus sounds like a real prat.
Is Houston a good bloke? How would I know? Why would I care? I wish him well and I know of nothing to bring him, into hatred ridicule or contempt.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Succinctly put INTBH!
Those two contradictory statements also had me wondering. It's a shame, because I always regarded some of Sunny's previous observations on this forum as among the better that I have read.
Consequently, and on reflection, I'll just say that most of us have had a brain-fart at some stage (I know that I have). Maybe this was Sunny's and we need to move on.
Those two contradictory statements also had me wondering. It's a shame, because I always regarded some of Sunny's previous observations on this forum as among the better that I have read.
Consequently, and on reflection, I'll just say that most of us have had a brain-fart at some stage (I know that I have). Maybe this was Sunny's and we need to move on.
It is possible to be a "good bloke", "a real prat", "a proper bastard" and an absolute idiot, all at the same time.
The difference is the audience as well as the "life" that is being portrayed.
As Gabriel Garcia Marquez observed, all people lead Three lives: the public, the private and the secret.
So yes, I'm sure Sir H. is a great guy in Mess, in the cockpit and in a lot of other places. However that does NOT mean automatically that he should chair anything.
It is my opinion that he was less than wise to accept a knighthood, which is a bizarre throwback to Tony Abbots past, completely out of keeping with Australias traditions, at least where we see ourselves these days. To my mind, that tells me something about Houstons belief system.
To put that another way, as I've said now in many different ways. Just because someone is lionised for their achievements does not automatically make them either (a) a nice person or (b) capable of taking on all sorts of new challenges.
To put that yet another way in reverse: President Lincoln, when told that his most successful General, Ulysses S. Grant, was a habitual drunkard, is said to have exclaimed: "then find out what he is drinking and send some to my other Generals!"
To make my point again: I find the early departure of Margaret Stalb troubling and the comments by a Chairman wading into a debate about Unicoms bizarre. Putting Two and Two together and jumping a mile to a conclusion, I wonder of Stalb ever had, or believed she was going to have, Houstons full support? Perhaps if I had explained myself that way I would not have to write the text of organisational behaviour 101 yet again. That is all.
The difference is the audience as well as the "life" that is being portrayed.
As Gabriel Garcia Marquez observed, all people lead Three lives: the public, the private and the secret.
So yes, I'm sure Sir H. is a great guy in Mess, in the cockpit and in a lot of other places. However that does NOT mean automatically that he should chair anything.
It is my opinion that he was less than wise to accept a knighthood, which is a bizarre throwback to Tony Abbots past, completely out of keeping with Australias traditions, at least where we see ourselves these days. To my mind, that tells me something about Houstons belief system.
To put that another way, as I've said now in many different ways. Just because someone is lionised for their achievements does not automatically make them either (a) a nice person or (b) capable of taking on all sorts of new challenges.
To put that yet another way in reverse: President Lincoln, when told that his most successful General, Ulysses S. Grant, was a habitual drunkard, is said to have exclaimed: "then find out what he is drinking and send some to my other Generals!"
To make my point again: I find the early departure of Margaret Stalb troubling and the comments by a Chairman wading into a debate about Unicoms bizarre. Putting Two and Two together and jumping a mile to a conclusion, I wonder of Stalb ever had, or believed she was going to have, Houstons full support? Perhaps if I had explained myself that way I would not have to write the text of organisational behaviour 101 yet again. That is all.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Margaret was probably the most principled CEO ASA has had. She was backstabbed by a bunch of cretins that learn't their craft under the most unprincipled turd of a CEO that ASA has ever had.
Just because Margaret was principled doesn't mean she was right for the job unfortunately.
Just because Margaret was principled doesn't mean she was right for the job unfortunately.
She was backstabbed by a bunch of cretins that learn't their craft under the most unprincipled turd of a CEO that ASA has ever had.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: FG central
Age: 53
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, being principled and doing the right thing don't get you promoted these days, so unlikely to see any decent management any time soon.
Combine it with the rise of the professional manager (who come straight from university, bypassing real world experience and life lessons), into mid tier management, and you won't see a change from 2-4 year bonuses all round management terms and me first management styles for another generation.
I wonder if the management degrees have ass kissing modules in the curriculum?
Combine it with the rise of the professional manager (who come straight from university, bypassing real world experience and life lessons), into mid tier management, and you won't see a change from 2-4 year bonuses all round management terms and me first management styles for another generation.
I wonder if the management degrees have ass kissing modules in the curriculum?