On Managing Government
The business of Government may be actually more like a business than we commonly consider. Perhaps it should be more so. The typical background and character checks that come with bringing a new senior executive to a major corporation are an excellent idea. When a board of directors puts out an executive search, the skills and qualifications of the applicant are alone insufficient to instill confidence. An exhaustive background check is part of what any board would do to ensure that the interest of stockholders is protected.
We should expect no less of our leaders. We are the "board of directors" for this thing we call a government, and we are responsible for managing our government so that the interests of our "stockholders" are protected.
The public servants who compete for the honor of doing the will of the people are our employees. Their failure to discharge their personal tax obligations is the moral equivalent of an employee with financial responsibilities who fails to correctly balance the till at the end of the day. At some point, as a manager, the question of whether the errors are a result of sloppy work or whether this is pilfering is simply not important. They have to go.
We’re not just talking about a good job here. We’re talking about a public trust.
We have seen enough evidence of financial impropriety among members of our government to rightfully suspect that it is neither uncommon nor insignificant. As stewards of our republic, we are well served to demand a bit more financial due diligence from those to whom we will entrust billions or even trillions of our dollars.
If we do not drive a harder bargain with our employees, we deserve to go on questioning both the performance of our employees and our own judgment. Let’s get busy raising the bar, and measuring their performance. They are not justified to take offense at our questioning their integrity. It’s nothing personal, this is business.
Pete Langlois
We should expect no less of our leaders. We are the "board of directors" for this thing we call a government, and we are responsible for managing our government so that the interests of our "stockholders" are protected.
The public servants who compete for the honor of doing the will of the people are our employees. Their failure to discharge their personal tax obligations is the moral equivalent of an employee with financial responsibilities who fails to correctly balance the till at the end of the day. At some point, as a manager, the question of whether the errors are a result of sloppy work or whether this is pilfering is simply not important. They have to go.
In a July 2007 survey, 6FigureJobs.com asked its 500,000+ executive and senior-level members if they thought taking a certified voluntary background check would make them a more marketable candidate. The survey revealed that eleven percent (11%) of respondents have already taken a voluntary background check. This is up four percent from the same survey conducted in June 2006, where only seven percent (7%) admitted to taking one. The survey results showed that the majority of respondents (49%) felt that a background check would make them more marketable and would consider taking one. This is a five percent increase compared to last year's results.
We’re not just talking about a good job here. We’re talking about a public trust.
We have seen enough evidence of financial impropriety among members of our government to rightfully suspect that it is neither uncommon nor insignificant. As stewards of our republic, we are well served to demand a bit more financial due diligence from those to whom we will entrust billions or even trillions of our dollars.
If we do not drive a harder bargain with our employees, we deserve to go on questioning both the performance of our employees and our own judgment. Let’s get busy raising the bar, and measuring their performance. They are not justified to take offense at our questioning their integrity. It’s nothing personal, this is business.
Pete Langlois
Posted by The Auditor at 2/26/2009 9:51 PM 
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: manage managing government audit taxes
Categories: uncategorized
Tags: manage managing government audit taxes
Well said, I was doing a search of congressional audit on google, and you we're the first sight. I couldn't have said it better myself, I have been writing political ideas for about 2 years from researching congress via video stream and listening the Associated press, and targeted news. I felt that an audit is the only sensible thing to do. More like an assessment test. you have to evaluate what you have before you can begin building or progressing, and I know that to be universal. This is insane that we allow these "employees" stand behind a protective veil. Which brings me to one of my political ideas. Representatives must meet on a filmed broadcast basis, meaning they would only be paid for the work they do on camera, something simple like a video social network much like youtube to monitor all committees, all governing posts. I should know if you are speaking for me, which the employees are clearly not speaking for me.
Reply to this