Cummings' Jobs Advert
Discussion
Countdown said:
Sway said:
Halb said:
Countdown said:
What kind of projects have been successfully implemented which have been staffed by "wierdos, misfits, people who never went to University"?
Projects failure isn't restricted to just the Public Sector. It's possibly more noticed in the Public Sector because the size of the projects carried out tends to be so big). I'm not saying there isn't a place for wierdos and misfits somewhere in the CS, (our IT team is full of them) but it's not likely to improve the CS in any significant way.
Bletchley Park?Projects failure isn't restricted to just the Public Sector. It's possibly more noticed in the Public Sector because the size of the projects carried out tends to be so big). I'm not saying there isn't a place for wierdos and misfits somewhere in the CS, (our IT team is full of them) but it's not likely to improve the CS in any significant way.
SOE?
Sway said:
You're right. Absolutely no evidence Turing was treated as a pariah and outcast, nor that the SOE did anything unusual or were made up of people far from the norm...
Turing wasn’t a genius because he was a pariah and an outcast. Similarly he wasn’t employed because the 1930’s version of D Cummings thought “we need the skills that only pariahs and outcasts have in order to crack the enemy codes”. You may as well argue that the CS needs to recruit more left-handed people because Alan Turing was left-handed.With regards to SOE (and the example of the SAS), yes, you need people with a certain skillset and mental approach, because that’s what the role requires. It doesn’t automatically mean that using somebody who would be successful at Bletchley Park or in the SOE would be good at the stuff that the CS do.
Countdown said:
I’m reasonably aware of how the CS works thanks. I was a CS until 2009.
What a surprise.Countdown said:
The examples you give to imply some kind of structural flaws in the CS show that you dont actually seem to know much about what the CS does and how it goes about doing this. E.g. The “mad ferry purchase” was a decision taken by Grayling, not the CS.
..and Cummings' reforms cover how decisions are made at all levels. Grayling's cockups being a symptom of a wider problem. Tell me about the reasons Universal Credit has been such a disaster?Countdown said:
Maybe somebody should have suggested to TSB that they employ more misfits and weirdos in their IT Dept?
Squirrel!! You seem threatened by someone wanting to do things differently.Go read up on the NHS IT system failure. Something like £10 billion wasted. Are you going to claim that the civil service were not involved in any way? That it was all someone else's fault? Did they turn off their "expert decision making" for that particular project? Or not have enough committees?
Tuna said:
We'll see. Some of the stuff he's suggesting is basic questions like "why don't we have colour photocopiers?" or "why is there no facility to view presentations in the cabinet room?". I don't think you need pilot studies to test whether there's an opportunity for improvement there.
Some of the stuff is about oversight and evidence - again, it's not about changing the decision making process, but adding parallel processes to protect against idiot decisions, or test conclusions for contradictions. (Red teams, pre-mortems and so on).
Some of the stuff is about responsibility - how is it a minister can commit to a project like HS2 (or Brexit) without having a defined process for how it will be delivered, or criteria for knowing when or if it should be abandoned?
From what I've read, government commits to a handful of very large scale projects in each parliament - and the success rate (Universal Credit, HS2) is low. In 2018, of the 12 major government projects, only one was rated as 'green' in the traffic light system. RCTs just don't work at that scale.
It's not as if he's suggesting stuff that people in other industries wouldn't recognised as best practise - it's that the civil service delivers information for key decisions in leather cases that were designed in 1860 and cost nearly £900 - more than a laptop, to deliver a handful of papers that cannot be searched, cross referenced, version managed or audited.
The problem isn’t that these things are unknown; it is that Government =/= private sector. There are drivers & motivations that just don’t factor in one sphere that can easily dominate in the other.Some of the stuff is about oversight and evidence - again, it's not about changing the decision making process, but adding parallel processes to protect against idiot decisions, or test conclusions for contradictions. (Red teams, pre-mortems and so on).
Some of the stuff is about responsibility - how is it a minister can commit to a project like HS2 (or Brexit) without having a defined process for how it will be delivered, or criteria for knowing when or if it should be abandoned?
From what I've read, government commits to a handful of very large scale projects in each parliament - and the success rate (Universal Credit, HS2) is low. In 2018, of the 12 major government projects, only one was rated as 'green' in the traffic light system. RCTs just don't work at that scale.
It's not as if he's suggesting stuff that people in other industries wouldn't recognised as best practise - it's that the civil service delivers information for key decisions in leather cases that were designed in 1860 and cost nearly £900 - more than a laptop, to deliver a handful of papers that cannot be searched, cross referenced, version managed or audited.
There have been plenty of attempts at bringing “private sector thinking” into Government. Why do you think they failed?
The “clever” bit will be about recruiting people who are motivated by Government & what it *could be* if only it were better. As the saying goes the people who are mad enough to think they can change the world usually do - but usually don’t get hired
skwdenyer said:
There have been plenty of attempts at bringing “private sector thinking” into Government. Why do you think they failed?
There's a slight suspicion that at least one factor is that the moment someone suggests doing something different, all the 'civil servants, unions and cross party MPS' rise up to tell them that they're wrong, and that any change must be subject to a committee, RCT and a thorough review before it can even be considered.The 'official' response to Cummings' stirring is a pretty strong case for why attempts at change have often failed.
Tuna said:
Countdown said:
I’m reasonably aware of how the CS works thanks. I was a CS until 2009.
What a surprise.Countdown said:
The examples you give to imply some kind of structural flaws in the CS show that you dont actually seem to know much about what the CS does and how it goes about doing this. E.g. The “mad ferry purchase” was a decision taken by Grayling, not the CS.
..and Cummings' reforms cover how decisions are made at all levels. Grayling's cockups being a symptom of a wider problem. Tell me about the reasons Universal Credit has been such a disaster?Countdown said:
Maybe somebody should have suggested to TSB that they employ more misfits and weirdos in their IT Dept?
Squirrel!! You seem threatened by someone wanting to do things differently.Go read up on the NHS IT system failure. Something like £10 billion wasted. Are you going to claim that the civil service were not involved in any way? That it was all someone else's fault? Did they turn off their "expert decision making" for that particular project? Or not have enough committees?
Tuna said:
skwdenyer said:
There have been plenty of attempts at bringing “private sector thinking” into Government. Why do you think they failed?
There's a slight suspicion that at least one factor is that the moment someone suggests doing something different, all the 'civil servants, unions and cross party MPS' rise up to tell them that they're wrong, and that any change must be subject to a committee, RCT and a thorough review before it can even be considered.The 'official' response to Cummings' stirring is a pretty strong case for why attempts at change have often failed.
Two areas IMHE that cause massive problems:
1) Commercial arrangements and legislative compliance (for contracts). Getting on and off contract on pretty much anything with a UK government department is a complete and utter bureaucratic nightmare. Dominic Cummings does talk about this area in one of his speeches on youtube, his claim is that leaving the EU will massively benefit the CS by ditching much of the systems built up to ensure compliance with EU procurement rules, not sure on that one but its an area where the scope for improvement is pretty vast.
2) Long periods of no investment leading to endless rounds of big bang procurements when the money is finally made available. Everyone knows it doesn't work but its the groundhog day that seems impossible to break free from, especially when there is no money.
BlackWidow13 said:
Ten pages in, lots of posters saying this could be fantastic and that they think they could fit right into Cummings’ brave new world. Even more complaining about the civil service.
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
Someone needs to forward this thread to Cummings, no need for him to even advertise. This thread’s full of suitable candidates.
True eliot, mentioned before as being a demonstration of what a simplistic view people take on things. [Press, not here as a side topic]
Even the Graunad [hasn't that calmed down post-GE...?] did a decent piece without painting him as Sauron to Boris' Morgoth:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan...
Even the Graunad [hasn't that calmed down post-GE...?] did a decent piece without painting him as Sauron to Boris' Morgoth:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan...
El stovey said:
BlackWidow13 said:
Ten pages in, lots of posters saying this could be fantastic and that they think they could fit right into Cummings’ brave new world. Even more complaining about the civil service.
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
Someone needs to forward this thread to Cummings, no need for him to even advertise. This thread’s full of suitable candidates.
Edited by Graveworm on Sunday 5th January 11:24
BlackWidow13 said:
Ten pages in, lots of posters saying this could be fantastic and that they think they could fit right into Cummings’ brave new world. Even more complaining about the civil service.
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
I’ve wrong-footed him by not applying. Classic Dom behaviour. He’ll find me, I’m sure he will.But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
Graveworm said:
El stovey said:
BlackWidow13 said:
Ten pages in, lots of posters saying this could be fantastic and that they think they could fit right into Cummings’ brave new world. Even more complaining about the civil service.
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
But has anyone apart from Kent Border Kenny actually applied?
Someone needs to forward this thread to Cummings, no need for him to even advertise. This thread’s full of suitable candidates.
as an asides, just to show how joined up and modern the civil service is, we have recently had our annual pay review concluded. the decision was to give a 2pc pay rise across the board. emails flying about saying how we want to recognise and reward you and how we appreciate how hard you've all worked this year. bada bing.
so the 2pc pay rise is implemented, and everyone gets it in their December pay packet. woo hoo.
except that the vast majority of the people I work with have actually ended up with having their take home pay either not going up at all, or being slightly reduced, because of the "pay rise".
that is because if you are in a certain grade (which most people are in my team) you will earn about 51-53k full time, or you might earn about 62/3/4/5k but most people in this grade work part time 4 days a week. so they also earn about 51/52 pro rata. the 2pc payrise adds another grand or so to your gross pay in either event. and by a twist of fate, if you go from earning 51 ish to 52k ish, your compulsory pension contributions go from 5.45pc to 7.35pc , on your entire salary.
the civil service - its great isn't it. the only frigging place you can get a pay-rise and your pay doesn't go up (or it actually goes down).
so the 2pc pay rise is implemented, and everyone gets it in their December pay packet. woo hoo.
except that the vast majority of the people I work with have actually ended up with having their take home pay either not going up at all, or being slightly reduced, because of the "pay rise".
that is because if you are in a certain grade (which most people are in my team) you will earn about 51-53k full time, or you might earn about 62/3/4/5k but most people in this grade work part time 4 days a week. so they also earn about 51/52 pro rata. the 2pc payrise adds another grand or so to your gross pay in either event. and by a twist of fate, if you go from earning 51 ish to 52k ish, your compulsory pension contributions go from 5.45pc to 7.35pc , on your entire salary.
the civil service - its great isn't it. the only frigging place you can get a pay-rise and your pay doesn't go up (or it actually goes down).
@Princeperch
Isn’t the Employees contribution rate based on their FTE salary? I’m sure it was when I was a member and you’re absolutely correct. There is a bit of a quirk/anomaly where a pay increase can be cancelled out by moving into the higher rate pension band. However if you got a 2% pay rise and your Ees contribution rate goes up by <2% nobody should have had a net pay cut.
On the plus side - the CS (& HMT in particular) are keen on the rest of the PubSec moving from Final Salary to Career Average schemes and yet strangely quiet about the PCSPS....It’s the most generous scheme around and if members earning less than £51k are only paying in 5 and a bit % that’s ridiculously low, Stakeholder pension members have to pay 5% in comparison for a much worse pension.
Isn’t the Employees contribution rate based on their FTE salary? I’m sure it was when I was a member and you’re absolutely correct. There is a bit of a quirk/anomaly where a pay increase can be cancelled out by moving into the higher rate pension band. However if you got a 2% pay rise and your Ees contribution rate goes up by <2% nobody should have had a net pay cut.
On the plus side - the CS (& HMT in particular) are keen on the rest of the PubSec moving from Final Salary to Career Average schemes and yet strangely quiet about the PCSPS....It’s the most generous scheme around and if members earning less than £51k are only paying in 5 and a bit % that’s ridiculously low, Stakeholder pension members have to pay 5% in comparison for a much worse pension.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff