Re: so ... let's merge DAM and FD?
On Thu, 02 Jul 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Richard Hecker wrote:
> > While consensus might exist that eliminating bureaucracy is
> > good, division of labor can be a good thing too. I do not think you
> > have established the need to combine the FD and DAM tasks. Are
> > you claiming the DAMs are too bureaucratic?
>
> No, what is bureaucratic is having to wait one month for FD to
> review one application, just to say `hey it's complete`, and pass it
> to the DAM. Then wait another month. I don't see the point in it
> being reviewed twice if FD has no say in the final decision and his
> only task is to check that everything is complete.
The main point is that the task has historically been more
parallizable at the FD point than at the DAM point; DAM is a
delegation, and the FD is not. (And since FD has the DAM as a
backstop, there's not as much scrutiny[1] in adding new people to that
position.)
Thus, it's better to catch problems and solve them at the FD stage
instead of waiting until they reach the DAM. That said, the obvious
solution to this issue is to get more poeple who have the time and
desire to be FD/DAM involved and demonstrate ability.
Don Armstrong
--
I don't care how poor and inefficient a little country is; they like
to run their own business. I know men that would make my wife a
better husband than I am; but, darn it, I'm not going to give her to
'em.
-- The Best of Will Rogers
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: