>>I’ve been senior enough in enough organizations, both within and outside a the military, to have a pretty good sense of what works and what doesn’t.
So have all my clients! They still want input on what is/is not working for others.
>>Announce the standards, fire anyone who doesn’t comply.
You REALLY believe that Kelly is the first person who did or said something very close to this? Hell, POTUS is a guy who’s known by the younger generation for firing people. I am in agreement with making the standards clear (I use slightly different terms, but for this discussion, this is fine). But why were they not clear before?
How do you know that the tactics you are suggesting haven’t been tried and failed in THIS WH? I know for a fact they fail just about everywhere else. The days of leaning on people to get them to be effective in ANY organization — to the extent they ever existed — are over. It is way too easy to find another job, to start a business, to contract, to do whatever else than work in a situation where the new guy, even if he has skins on the wall, comes in and starts demanding things. Look at all of the people that were successful CEOs or leaders of organizations that came into another one and failed miserably. Gil Amelio at Apple, for example. There are others. I’m not saying these guys failed because they did what Kelly did. But what I am saying is that past success is no guarantee of future success — in investing or in organizational management. And starting off on the wrong foot is always a bad thing.
>>I’ve never had to do more than two firings before the listening skills of those remaining improve remarkably.
I’ve only fired people for dishonesty or unprofessional interpersonal behavior (i.e. workplace disputes that got out of hand). Even then only a few. Firing people is expensive and potentially dangerous to your organization. I don’t want my team to live in fear — I want them so busy being effective, they don’t have time for anything else. They aren’t going to bust their ass for someone they don’t like.
>>takes time this Administration does not have
He doesn’t have time NOT to do it right. He can’t run this office like a military post or branch of service. Plus, if it were this easy, why didn’t Trump pay everyone on staff a visit and say virtually the same thing? 5 minute speech and Trump is well known for firing people.
I’m telling you, this stuff just does not work. You’re telling me that the people at the WH that have been problematic — leaking, lack of attention to the agenda, whatever — were clever enough to get away with it for 6 months and didn’t fear getting caught. OK, so maybe they didn’t fear getting fired when Priebus was in there. Fine — I’ll grant you that. But their arrogance isn’t going to respond well to a “get your ass in line” speech, especially when they STILL believe they’ll get away with whatever it is they’re doing.
>>all you need is the first one
I wish! Again, you know this speech was the first one, how?? If it wasn’t, it didn’t work then. If it was, then the staff just ignored it.
Think what you want; believe what you want. I’m speaking as much in a vacuum as I am in this particular situation. I’m telling you what I tell clients and those that do my training programs. I keep getting phone calls!
What senior person in the White House was fired day 1 prior to this?
The days of leaning on people to get them to be effective in ANY organization — to the extent they ever existed — are over. It is way too easy to find another job, to start a business, to contract, to do whatever else than work in a situation where the new guy, even if he has skins on the wall, comes in and starts demanding things.
The problem with your analysis is that you're applying standard corporate strategies to a military or pseudo-military organization where equivalent options for the terminated aren't readily available. They can't just leave and "do better or just as well" elsewhere. There's only one White House - one shot at being that close to national power and having a chance to leave a mark on history, however small your part may be.
I’ve only fired people for dishonesty or unprofessional interpersonal behavior (i.e. workplace disputes that got out of hand). Even then only a few. Firing people is expensive and potentially dangerous to your organization.
What about incompetence/attitude/poor fit? During the initial assault in the Iraq War, the command elements of the First Marine Division came to believe that one of the maneuver regiment task forces -- nearly 6000 Marines total -- was not being sufficiently aggressive. The regimental commander was urged to go faster, but they still weren't satisfied. So, he was fired, right then, in the middle of assault phase, and replaced by someone more aggressive.
Should they not have replaced him unless he was "dishonest" or engaged in "unprofessional personal behavior"? What's wrong with "we're firing you because you are not performing up to our expectations, and we don't have the luxury of shipping you off for training in the hope that you'll improve?
What I think you are failing to consider is that a new White House is not a long-established organization with a distinct culture, well-understood processes, and business operations that will basically continue to run just fine while you get your feet wet. Each is basically created from scratch, except for some long-term low-level staff who may have an agenda different from the new Administration.
In that type of situation, the two most important things to do are 1) make sure you have the right people in the right jobs, and 2) ensure you quickly establish the work culture/environment you want. Mooch was the wrong guy and needed to go. The backbiting/infighting among the staff -- which they all already knew was wrong but chose to do anyway -- was excessive. When people know the rules but are violating them anyway because they do not believe there are any consequences, they need to be disabused of that notion as rapidly as possible.
Everyone is not salvageable. In something as unique and important as the White House, there simply isn't time to go slow.