Why Leadership fails us. Just my thoughts

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This was originally written in response to a question by Andy Ray who asked for proof that there is a Y2K related problem out there.

Please, others chime in if you feel I am way off base. Since most medium to large business choose not to, or can not put their systems "through/into" a true y2k testing invironment (like will be experienced Jan 1 99' onward), it is very difficult to answer your question in any detail. I think the corporate culture for many companies, based on what I've gleamed here off the net, is such that even if they found out there was a problem that would impact their operations in Jan. 99', that they would not be able to keep it secret from their competitors (who would use it against them), or investors (who would take out their money/stock!). So, your damned if you do and your damned if you don't. Many companies have or are trying to fix the problem. (just see their y2k expenses as shown at various times here in this forum), so don't think that they don't realize there is a lurking problem out there. Still, I believe, that even when a fix has been attempted, as I said before, they won't/can't put their system through a live system check. So....truly, I believe, your question, which is legitimate, can't be answered. This does not mean there will not be a serious problem. The gov't's answer seems to be "let things happen, and we'll deal with the problem after it happens. Bad approach. The reason being, What if it is bad? If you are not pro-active in mitigating the effects of a potentially bad situation (as described above), ie, have the populus prepare for at least the middle ground arena of adverse effects (level 5-7 out of a scale of 10 in terms of severity), then, in my eyes, at least in terms of a family situation, you are being irresponsible. Why couldn't that line of thinking have been used for this situation. The real statement is that it should have been used here. You know.....even if, even if this ends up being just a bump in the road, heads should role at the vary top. Common sense, like is used when preparing for a known event like an approaching hurricane, just was not used. And if ends up being a disasterous event, people need to REMEMBER those in Leadership who did not use their common sense in dealing with this problem. God help us. Tom

-- Thomas Saul (thomas.saul@yale.edu), September 10, 1999

Answers

....common sense......leadership.....

Do I sense an oxymoron here?

Thomas, I believe that our "leadership" took a calculated gamble. If the problem is really bad, then people in population centers are at risk. Many programmers work in population centers. If they were told that there is a substantial probability of things not working, and that they might be in danger, and that the government does not have enough troops to protect every population center in the nation, the tendency would be for the programmers to leave in droves, seeking the safety of their families first.

Others would bail out, as well.

Stresses would be place on our distribution systems. Those stresses would convince the population that there would be shortages in everything -- including cash -- which would result in bank runs and potential failure of the banking system. Remember that in April the storage food distribution system was overloaded, as were sellers of Alladdin lamps, Kayadyn water purifiers, sellers of generators, etc. Pressure was beginning to mount. It dropped rapidly when government spin defused the situation.

And what of the people who couldn't afford a year's supply of food, 10 barrels of water, a 10 KW generator, 10 acres to farm, and all the needed tools? Why, it would be politically incorrect for only 'the rich' to be able to prepare. [It might also lead to some serious rioting based on perceived class discrimination.] The obvious answer is to level the playing field by convincing those who are able to prepare that there is no need to prepare. That way everyone has an equal chance at the lifeboat when the Titianic sinks.

So, your question -- or approach -- is one that most of us have scratched our heads about for a long time. The reasons I see why we have not been publically warned are listed above. I see no hope that things will change to any large extent. When press releases concerning yesterday's NERC drill state that, "no Y2K problems were reported," one realizes that the release is duplicitious......of course no Y2K problems were reported in 1999.

-- de (delewis@XOUTinetone.net), September 10, 1999.


de- Not only were no problems reported because it's 1999, no problems were reported because they weren't LOOKING for problems, they were SIMULATING the environment of problems in order to DRILL the folks on what SHOULD be DONE if there ARE problems.

The press reporting that there were no problems is complete spin, designed to re-inforce the impression that things are completely OK.

Chuck

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), September 10, 1999.


er....Chuck

I think that's the meaning of "duplicitious."

-- de (delewis@XOUTinetone.net), September 10, 1999.


Another possibility is to plan on severely downsizing at year end... as Ty seems to be doing by discontinuing all beanie babies at that time. Anyone else following this agenda?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), September 10, 1999.

Leadership requires a person with an ability to charm, motivate, even manipulate other people. Note that intelligence or knowledge is not required.

A person of intelligence, with a grasp of the issues, doens't necessarily have leadership ability.

The melding of the traits is a rarity, in general, and almost non-existent in these times.

Psychological experiments have been performed (some grad student's Master's study or Doctoral thesis) where a problem is presented to a group. It is confirmed that the most vocal, outgoing person's solution is usually adopted by the group, even though a quieter, less aggressive person's solution was the more valid.

Maybe the Annunaki slipped some sheep genes in, in addition to the ape and "god" genes, when they created "The Adam." :-)

-- A (A@AisA.com), September 11, 1999.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ