Drive the process

How can anyone who loves the government of our country not understand that the founders designed it in such a way that we are supposed to drive the process?
 
AssHatZombie said:
There does need to be some vision. It need not have a strong dynamic leader though. Though that helps and is a quick and effective way, years of slow indocrination through coordinated propaganda can acheeive the same effect, its more subconscious and complete.
Click to expand...
There is no direction in endlessly repeating platitudes you can read on posters on the wall at work. If that is your form of "leadership", you need to get out of the way.

Vision is far more than this. Dr. King was a leader, "drive the process" is a platitude and can be found on the wall. I can read and don't need some inane "leader" reading it to me.
 
evince said:
How can anyone who loves the government of our country not understand that the founders designed it in such a way that we are supposed to drive the process?
Click to expand...

I think the phrase gets colored from being around too many PMI certified mba types. Your experience may vary.
 
Damocles said:
There is no direction in endlessly repeating platitudes you can read on posters on the wall at work. If that is your form of "leadership", you need to get out of the way.

Vision is far more than this. Dr. King was a leader, "drive the process" is a platitude and can be found on the wall. I can read and don't need some inane "leader" reading it to me.
Click to expand...

I just hate the phrase. People who talk about themselves doing it. eww.

To me it is equivalent to Ignorance Based Management.
 
Damocles said:
Dr. King didn't run around and tell people to drive the process, he gave direction and drove, he acted. He was not one step removed from the process.

If your role is solely to tell other people to be Dr. King. Then your role is worthless. Be Dr. King and drive, instead of a back seat driver.
Click to expand...

Wrong again brother. Dr. King didn't devise the process himself. His role was to drive it through speeches and example. That was his role, but there were countless other roles he could not assume and he was many steps removed from those actions.

Dr. King was not the Civil Rights Movement. He was part of it .. the part America is comfortable with glorifying. His was but one role, a big role, but he was not the process.
 
Damocles said:
There is no direction in endlessly repeating platitudes you can read on posters on the wall at work. If that is your form of "leadership", you need to get out of the way.

Vision is far more than this. Dr. King was a leader, "drive the process" is a platitude and can be found on the wall. I can read and don't need some inane "leader" reading it to me.
Click to expand...

Gobbly-gook double-speak.

Dr. King drove the process and you admire him .. yet goobly-gook about people who drive the process.
 
blackascoal said:
Wrong again brother. Dr. King didn't devise the process himself. His role was to drive it through speeches and example. That was his role, but there were countless other roles he could not assume and he was many steps removed from those actions.

Dr. King was not the Civil Rights Movement. He was part of it .. the part America is comfortable with glorifying. His was but one role, a big role, but he was not the process.
Click to expand...
Yes, his role was to drive it, not to tell others to.

Get my drift?

If all you do is speak platitudes from posters your role in business or in life is one step removed from anything worthwhile.

Making speeches that actually "drive the process" is not the same thing as speaking "synergy" and "driving the process" while teaching "six sigma" and never producing one thing that the consumer will ever see. If what you do will never effect the customer, you are one step removed from worthwhile to the company and in this economy you better start looking for gainful employment right away.
 
AssHatZombie said:
There does need to be some vision. It need not have a strong dynamic leader though. Though that helps and is a quick and effective way, years of slow indocrination through coordinated propaganda can acheeive the same effect, its more subconscious and complete.
Click to expand...

Whether you can actually see the "leader" or not, there is still someone or a group of someones who are driving the process.

I think you confuse the driving with the destination. The process being driven doesn't necessary have to be in your best interest for it to be successful.

The solution to processes that are not in your best interests is to drive a process that is.

Either you drive, or you're just a fucking passenger .. and wherever you get dropped off is out of your control.
 
Damocles said:
Yes, his role was to drive it, not to tell others to.

Get my drift?

If all you do is speak platitudes from posters your role in business or in life is one step removed from anything worthwhile.

Making speeches that actually "drive the process" is not the same thing as speaking "synergy" and "driving the process" while teaching "six sigma" and never producing one thing that the consumer will ever see. If what you do will never effect the customer, you are one step removed from worthwhile to the company and in this economy you better start looking for gainful employment right away.
Click to expand...

Several things brother.

Employees don't drive the process.They do what those who drive tell them to do. I have employees. They don't drive, I do.

As a project manager, you drive the process designed for you to drive.

My point is that within the scope of every process, there are going to be the need for those who speak to it and sell it, which may or not be the visionary who thought it up. King was not the visionary who thought up the Civil Rights Movement, he was part of it.

Seriously, this aversion to leadership, which is exactly what driving the process is, is confusing to say the least.
 
blackascoal said:
Several things brother.

Employees don't drive the process.They do what those who drive tell them to do. I have employees. They don't drive, I do.

As a project manager, you drive the process designed for you to drive.

My point is that within the scope of every process, there are going to be the need for those who speak to it and sell it, which may or not be the visionary who thought it up. King was not the visionary who thought up the Civil Rights Movement, he was part of it.

Seriously, this aversion to leadership, which is exactly what driving the process is, is confusing to say the least.
Click to expand...
It's faux leadership. And self-satisfied assholery, and the summary dismissal of input from others, that's the problem. None of those are valuable, and are mostly an exercise in narcissism, for the self important PM.


This is why hiearchical leadership always fails. It eventually becomes isolated and disconnected from failing to properly utilize the power of multinodal networks.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's faux leadership. And self-satisfied assholery, and the summary dismissal of input from others, that's the problem. None of those are valuable, and are mostly an exercise in narcissism, for the self important PM.


This is why hiearchical leadership always fails. It eventually becomes isolated and disconnected from failing to properly utilize the power of multinodal networks.
Click to expand...

Gobbly-gook my brother that has no real world application.

Either you drive or you get driven. It's that's simple.

This sounds like whining from sheep who got driven to slaughter by people who drove their own process.

And hiearchical leadership does not always fail. It has existed in the military from the very moment the military was even thought of. They remain isolated for very good reason and multinodal networks have limited use to that structure.

Why such aversion to leadership?
 
blackascoal said:
Gobbly-gook my brother that has no real world application.

Either you drive or you get driven. It's that's simple.
Click to expand...
WOw. You're a real brainwash victim. That's sad.
This sounds like whining from sheep who got driven to slaughter by people who drove their own process.

And hiearchical leadership does not always fail. It has existed in the military from the very moment the military was even thought of. They remain isolated for very good reason and multinodal networks have limited use to that structure.

Why such aversion to leadership?
Click to expand...

It's an aversion to elitism and institutional dysfunction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top