Good ol’ cowardism… the Danish minister of Transport
So, we’re back at my pet-peeve: Politicians. Last week’s edition of S?ndagsavisen featured an interview with the Danish minister of Transport, Flemming Hansen. DSB (the public transport company), and in particular BaneDanmark (responsible for the railways) has had major problems with run-down railways causing huge delays. This is nothing new - they haven’t been properly maintained for the last 35 years. Problem is that now-a-days they can actually detect how bad it is and for safety reasons, trains are now limited to speeds of 40 km/h on some stretches. DSB is still owned publicly as is BaneDanmark, so they fall under the minister of transport. So far so good - Flemming Hansen has been through a lot of hot water the last year or so due to a couple of scandals.
Now, he has been on the receiving end of people’s complaints, and with good reason. Lack of information, terrible delays and a no-refund policy has had commuters in arms everywhere. His retort? ‘It’s everyone else’s fault!’ Just like back in kindergarden when you ran out of good reasons why you pulled poor Kirsten’s hair… ‘Look at all the trouble the everyone else is causing’. Then slip away quietly into the shadows. Problem is when everyone is pointing at you, including the people you’re trying to blame. The Danish system of politics is pretty simple: We choose representatives to take responsebility for everything getting done. They in turn hire people to actually carry out the job. Problem - for Flemming Hansen, anyway - is that the responsebility is the same no matter how many you hire - how much you delegate. It’s the same way as in every other organisation. You are responsible for the people you hire, whether you like it or not and whether they mess up or not.
So, to sum things up - it’s pretty simple. Flemming Hansen is responsible for Danes getting to work on time when they use public transportation. He knew this taking the job. And he defends himself by saying the following people/factors are to blame: The boards of DSB and BaneDanmark, former ministers, former governments and a growing number of passengers. He even blames the character in DSB’s commercials, Harry - since the money used to make the commercials could have been used for maintaining the railways.
Okay - let’s take these arguments starting from the last one. Aside from the sheer stupidity in blaming an animated character, there is a problem with that argument. DSB is separate from BaneDanmark - to put it in terms that should be clear to most: DSB drive trains, BaneDanmark maintains railways. One has nothing to with the other - it’s separate budgets, separate people. They are dependant on each other, yes - but not the same entity. But yes, the money could have been used to inform passengers instead… although there is that little problem of planning. The commercial has probably been underway somewhere between 3-6 months. What could have been saved? Only the money used to air the commercial - and that is maybe 15-20% of the total cost. The last 80-85% are lost with nothing to show for it, not to mention the long-term marketing plan would have to be revised… Not to mention the lost passengers from not airing the commercial…
Former governments and ministers are certainly to blame - no doubt about that. But it is far from constructive nor absolving blaming them - the current situation is still the current minister’s problem. Come election-time, yes, by all means - use this to slander the other parties. Solving this situation, stuff it. You took the seat - you accepted the responsebility - end of story. Maybe, it’s the old story of buying the cat in the sack, but it’s still your cat - you feed it, clean it and in the end… kill it. Blaming DSB and BaneDanmark is the worst one. Every finger you point at them - you point 4 back at yourself. Yes, they are idiots… but who was the greater idiot hiring them?
Basically it’s Organisation 101. If you are at the top - it’s always your fault and always your employees that made the success happen. In return, you are the one that gets paid the most. It’s a dirty job - but when you accept it - you have to be man (or woman) enough to take it. Now, how should he have handled the situation? Well, ideally - when he took the seat, he should have made inquiries to figure out any potential problems. They should be pretty easy to spot when it comes to public transportation. Next step would be to estimate the time and money requirements to fix the problem. Then go public with his findings - sum things up: I’ve found these problems within my ministery - I intend to do the following things about it - and they are going to cost us this much in time and money.
Living in a non-ideal world - he decided to do the following: When the public began noticing increasing problems with the railways, he asked BaneDanmark what the problem was… this is again Organisation 101 - never let people investigate themselves… they are biased you know. He then went public with a plan to correct (the minor) problems that BaneDanmark found. Now that the scandal is red-hot, he is blaming them, but otherwise letting them handle the problems themselves. This is a mistake in my book - you are telling people that screwed up, I think you’re all morons, but correct the mess you made. Way to go for the motivational speech…
Now, if this was a standard company structure - the following would have happened: The CEO would figure out where the problem was concentrated - take full responsebility and sack the people in charge of that department. Probably hire a few consultants to figure out which changes were needed and hire a new set of people. If this didn’t fix the problem - he’d probably end up resigning if the problem was big enough. If it had been possible for Flemming Hansen to loose my vote… he had by now. Not from having problems in his domain of responsebility, but by failing to accept them as his and by failing to take leadership in correcting the mistakes.