Just posting this and asking for your opinion.
Consider the following scenario:
A government organisation (called ABC) hires a new senior manager (one level below the CEO) on some sort of a temporary fixed-term contract – after the previous manager had left to another institution. Let’s call this person D.
D then immediately needs to “take action” – that’s what senior managers are supposed to do, right? D initiates a review of a large IT project (fair enough) and gets a friend in to deliver that review (called IC for independent consultant).
IC gets a shitload of money for stating the obvious and recommends the instantiation for a programme mangager (called E). When E starts working for ABC, everyone is wondering what this person is doing – because he/she states the obvious and doesn’t produce much output the IT team could use. Oh, did I mention that E is a friend of D (as well as IC was).
This is probably a scenario happening n times all over the place. What annoys me is that D, IC and E have no clue what they’re doing, have no clue of appropriately managing a large IT project and particularly that the jobs of IC and E were “created” without publishing them and without providing others (potentially much better people, and I don’t refer to myself here :-)) a chance to apply.
Still – happens everyday, but it really p*sses me off when it happens in the public sector, funded by my taxes. I have no issues with getting friends and people you know involved with your projects, work etc. – but the public sector should offer a fair and reasonable process. You’re working in a private company – fine, do what you like.
Do you guys think I’m reasonable here? Or am I asking for too much? How do your oganisations deal with bringing in friends and your old mates network?