No email for Chertoff or Rumsfeld

[davefoc]

I was wondering what folks have to say about this.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11371281/site/newsweek/

Frankly my opinion of the Bush administration has gotten so low, that I really thought that it had bottomed out and might actually go up a little. Maybe confirmation biases were leading me to see elements in every story as some sort of evidence for my views on the administration when the evidence wasn't really there.

And then comes this. The leader of the Homeland Security department doesn't do email. Huh. You're in charge of an agency where rapid clear communication is amongst the highest priorities and you haven't taken the time to learn a key element of modern communication . Nice. Is there any level of incompetence that is too low for a Bush appointee?

And after amazing communication screwups during the early hours and days of Katrina that Chertoff still can't quite explain he still hasn't bothered to learn to use email.

 

[Beady]

And after amazing communication screwups during the early hours and days of Katrina that Chertoff still can't quite explain he still hasn't bothered to learn to use email.

I'm no Chertoff fan, but I fail to see the connection between email and an executive's effectiveness. Is the ability of, say, an army general measured by his personal skill on the rifle range? Seems to me, a general is measured by his ability to use the people who use the rifles.

 

[Chaos]

I'm no Chertoff fan, but I fail to see the connection between email and an executive's effectiveness. Is the ability of, say, an army general measured by his personal skill on the rifle range? Seems to me, a general is measured by his ability to use the people who use the rifles.

No - an army general has the job of commanding an army. This is done by receiving information and issueing orders. And this particular general adamantly refuses to learn or use the most efficient way of receiving information and issueing orders.

This has nothing to do with generals and rifle skills. This is more like a head chef refusing to learn about the difference between cow pies and apple pies - i.e. something that is INTEGRAL to doing his job.

 

[webfusion]

ineffective use of his time...

If he had an eMail account, there is little doubt it would occupy his time to a great extent in dealing with the massive volumes of SPAM ---- anyone who has a well-known eMail address is likely to receive hundreds, if not thousands, of bogus emails hourly.

Like this:
"degrade advance roadway"
"Years apricot not claret"
"Does denigrate be effete"
"answered reddening at the recollection"
"vacillations between an evident disposition"
"why shouldnt you go in the same ship"
"condition little anxiously"
"great attachment for the veal cutlet"

and an endless stream of such messages which flood the eMail system.

I am dealing with a huge volume of nonsense messages by utilizing MailWasher to delete them off the server, before they can clog up my inbox. But, even that takes up my time...

I cringe to think what I would have to wade through if my eMail address was well-publicized!

 

[Manny]

I try to avoid email for anything other than cover letters for attachments. I've found that people treat it too much like conversation and too little like written communications. They're inexact when they make factual assertions, they're prone to hyperbole, they pass on rumor as fact. Additionally, people find it too easy to hit the "send" button and they email things which they wouldn't bother to put in a proper memo or pick up a telephone to communicate.

Perhaps it's different in technical fields. But in my field I've found that eschewing email is the way to go.

 

[brodski]

In ethe UK government ministers, and even some very senior officials just don't use e-mail, our ministers still use the old "box" system, where at the end of every day all the papers they need to see are put into (specially made) red boxes, for them to take home and read. It filters out eth rubbish, the all have e-mail addresses, but Its their PA's or Special Advisers that tend to read it. It is an excellent filters system which means that those in charge don't spend their whole time sifting through rubbish the where CCed into, just in case they where interested.

 

[corplinx]

Chertoff will have to avoid email at this point for liability reasons. If a big disaster strikes and hes spending all day in meetings, visiting sites, etc and someone emails him that a levee is breaking; it will be waved in front of him by congress in an effort to project incompetence.

 

[Mark]

Chertoff will have to avoid email at this point for liability reasons. If a big disaster strikes and hes spending all day in meetings, visiting sites, etc and someone emails him that a levee is breaking; it will be waved in front of him by congress in an effort to project incompetence.

And phone records would indicate a phone call, so let's take that away, too. Oh, and a memo leaves a paper trail, so we can't have that. Morse code might work, but it would be too easy to tap into.

Really, they only effective solution is to have someone in charge who can't read, use email, a telephone or anything else. Maybe smoke signals would work for him.

 

[brodski]

Chertoff will have to avoid email at this point for liability reasons. If a big disaster strikes and hes spending all day in meetings, visiting sites, etc and someone emails him that a levee is breaking; it will be waved in front of him by congress in an effort to project incompetence.

so you think he should use the "la la la I can't her you defense"?
I completely understand why he doesn't have an e-mail account, why would he, he has people to read his mail for him both electronic and physical, all his correspondence will be filtered through that office anyway, he will (one hopes) get to hear of the stuff he needs to hear about. Claiming that he didn't know, because no-one e-mailed him, because he didn't have an e-mail address, is just worse than stupid.

 

[hgc]

... is just worse than stupid.

positively Rumsfeldian.

 

[fishbob]

My old boss used to have his assistant screen and print his emails, then stack them in his in-basket.

Maybe not as technology proficient as learning how to use email, but he was quite effective with his method.
So I suspect the screwups were due to other factors.

 

[davefoc]

This story goes right to some of my own biases.

I was a low level manager for most of my engineering career. A low level manager to be successful must be highly involved and hands on. I generally saw it as a problem that higher level managers were isolated from the technology and the day to day operation of an engineering operation.

But, I also realized that my view of the world was obscured by the facts of my situation. As people rise to higher levels of management their abilities to maintain contact with lower level details must be reduced in kind. So maybe my biases towards being hands on were exactly the kind of biases that would have prevented success as a higher level manager.

So was my negative view of Chertoff's unwillingness to use email an artifact of my biases from being a low level hands on manager or were they an objective truth derived from my experiences in the management of organizations?

Beady and Chaos did a perfect job of expressing my own internal discussions on this issue:

Beady:

I'm no Chertoff fan, but I fail to see the connection between email and an executive's effectiveness. Is the ability of, say, an army general measured by his personal skill on the rifle range? Seems to me, a general is measured by his ability to use the people who use the rifles.

Chaos:

No - an army general has the job of commanding an army. This is done by receiving information and issueing orders. And this particular general adamantly refuses to learn or use the most efficient way of receiving information and issueing orders.

This has nothing to do with generals and rifle skills. This is more like a head chef refusing to learn about the difference between cow pies and apple pies - i.e. something that is INTEGRAL to doing his job.

It seems to me that the Chaos view is closer to the truth. Not only does Chertoff not have the advantage of using email, but he may also fail to appreciate the problems and opportunities associated with what is a primary means of communication in his department.

Couple this with the possibility that a failure to use email suggests that Chertoff may not be comfortable with computer concepts and techniques that are absolutely critical to his job. Does he understand how to use internet search engines? Does he understand elementary database concepts? Can he assess when a computerized approach to a particular problem might be valuable? Does he even understand what people sound like that have those kind of capabilities?

Even now, he mumbles on about communication failures without being able to voice solutions to the problem. They had a guy on the scene almost immediately observing failed levees. Has Chertoff considered the possibility that a possible solution was for emails from this guy to Homeland security leadership so that pictures and maybe video of what he was seeing could be attached to emails and distributed as it became available? How in the world FEMA at the low levels could know almost instantly that levees were breaking and the information couldn't move upwards in the organization for hours?

 

[Psi Baba]

Say, wasn't one of Brown's excuses that he sent Chertoff an e-mail? That would explain quite a bit. Apparently, Chertoff doesn't know how use CNN either, seeing as how he was one of the last people to know that the levees broke. Oh, and let's not forget his famous line, "This was totally unexpected. No one could have forseen this." With that he just insulted the intellect and hard work of a goodly portion of researchers at LSU, writers for National Geographic, scientists at the NWS, and the thousands or millions of people who actually read things. Just the type of statement you'd expect from someone who is woefully out of touch.

 

[hgc]

Let's face it: It's not that Chertoff doesn't use email that's the problem. It's that he doesn't get the information he needs in order to lead DHS, apparently, as in the case of Katrina. He's responsible to make sure he has the tools and info flow in order to do his job. If it wasn't going to be email, then it should have been something, anything. What a knucklehead.

 

[Beady]

No - an army general has the job of commanding an army. This is done by receiving information and issueing orders.

For which he has an entire entourage of aides and other assorted flunkies. He spends very little time on the phone/radio, himself.

And this particular general adamantly refuses to learn or use the most efficient way of receiving information and issueing orders.

Email???

This has nothing to do with generals and rifle skills. This is more like a head chef refusing to learn about the difference between cow pies and apple pies - i.e. something that is INTEGRAL to doing his job.

Using email is integral to Chertoff's job, huh?

 

[WildCat]

Using email is integral to Chertoff's job, huh?

Suppose there was a crisis and it could only be solved if Chertoff grew a bigger penis. Without email, how would he know where to get the pills?

 

[corplinx]

so you think he should use the "la la la I can't her you defense"?
I completely understand why he doesn't have an e-mail account, why would he, he has people to read his mail for him both electronic and physical, all his correspondence will be filtered through that office anyway, he will (one hopes) get to hear of the stuff he needs to hear about. Claiming that he didn't know, because no-one e-mailed him, because he didn't have an e-mail address, is just worse than stupid.

Actually, you couldnt have misread what I said worse. Email is receiptless and people who get lots tend to delete in whole blocks just to sort out the important messages. If email is going to be the gold standard of communication according to congress, its better to not have it. Someone in a top position will get too much, have too little time to read it, and wind up delegating email to a staffer which defeats the point.

 

[Beady]

If email is going to be the gold standard of communication according to congress...

Plenty of people in government, including Congress, have email. Even so, is anyone here naive enough to believe these congresscritters actually read their own email? The same system is in place as for telephone calls and snail mail: their staff goes through it first, dealing with and answering virtually all of it, and the boss sees only ~1%, if that much.

 

[brodski]

Actually, you couldnt have misread what I said worse. Email is receiptless and people who get lots tend to delete in whole blocks just to sort out the important messages. If email is going to be the gold standard of communication according to congress, its better to not have it. Someone in a top position will get too much, have too little time to read it, and wind up delegating email to a staffer which defeats the point.

Actually, I would be very surprised if any of his e-mail was allowed to be fully deleted, unless your FOI act is less stringent in this regards than the UK's.
His e-mail was always going to be delegated to a "staffer", just like all his other communications are, they provide a filter so that only the useful stuff gets through. Part of the job of anyone in a top position, is to surround themselves with people who can make the right decisions about what should be seen by the top brass, and what should not.