Gate 14 Revisted or TSA not so bad
Published by Mark Von Nida on April 26th, 2008
By Mark
Great post by Al regarding the TSA. I can’t think of a better example of the descent of bureaucracy into the sublimly ridiculous . I was on a trip to DC once with former Senator Alan Dixon. The Senator was pulled out of line for special screening because he had left his shoes on his feet. I haven’t heard of a single incident of former senator turned terrorist but I must admit that doesn’t mean it can’t happen.
Comments concerning TSA employees as well as former senators gone wild are welcome but a larger conversation about how to measure success for bureaucracy would be appreciated. Airline security is a response to the public’s safety fears. Those fears were manifested in a drop in demand for airline tickets so, government stepped in to prop up the industry. Afterall, the airline industry requires a government provided infrastruture {airports, control towers,communication standards..) to perform at modern levels. It is not a question of whether we need airport security, just how do we do it well.
I don’t agree that govenment necessarily is that much different to any service business. Fairness is a component of any service. Injustice is usually not tolerated by consumers. The universal approach to screening passengers has more to do with common law enforcement practices than it does to a fairness doctrine.
If we adopted profiles, terrorists/criminals would simply adjust to the profiles to get around security. In fact there in lies the paradox. We build a system to thwart the terrorists/criminals, who in turn constantly adjusts to the routine which we have adjusted to prevent the last security breach from happening again.
The compulsary nature of passenger screening prevents the kind of feedback a typical service business would receive from customers but in the long term, success is market driven. When customers stop flying, passenger screening will adjust accordingly.
My point is that most of the federal government agencies actually have an industry support role. Effectiveness can be measured by the health of the industry an agency is designed to support.
Filed under Uncategorized
April 26th, 2008 at 11:28 am
[...] Lazy Media [...]
April 27th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Great leaders, be they business, political/goverment, or military are successful thinking ahead of the curve. Most people in charge, they aren’t really leaders just care takers, react to situations. Often this reaction is in response to a catastophic event and there is demand for immediate action. Many times the decision is made with undue influence from outside sources with a different motive, and the issue is not resolved properly or in some cases made worse.
Great leaders are bold in their decisions and are willing to take calculated risk and take responsibility for the decision.
The result is a lot of wasted spending and no one willing to step up to correct the problem. Just name calling and postering.
A recent example of real leadership was the Shelter Care facility. Chair Alan Dunstan identified the correct solution, took some risk and made his case with board members, and the result will be better for all involved.
The response by all government(Republican and Democrat) in general to the 9/11 attacks has been lacking in this same leadership.