Here is the famous Malta WhatsApp Number List 2 method that had been refurbished to me ages ago. Full of good intentions. Look for example at this representation of the use of the Mareva 2 method throughout the life cycle of a project Usefulness of MAREVA2 throughout a project Use and added value of MAREVA2 throughout a project It is all well and good. Mareva 2 can be used both as an opportunity study and as a decision to launch a project, as well as in the implementation and piloting phase, as well as in the deployment and assessment / results measurement phase. It all looks very nice… on paper. Sorrowful spirits could retort that the representation is poorly chosen, giving more space to framing and launching than to piloting.

The minimal portion left for deployment will leave you dreaming of all those who have one day had to implement changes in organization, process or digital systems in administrations. This representation is only the reflection of a primacy of thinkers and strategists (the head) over the performers of low works (the legs – or the arms), the basic mental model of our public administrations. Where the shoe pinch is that when you take a closer look at the Mareva 2 methodology, the word “gas plant” immediately comes to mind.

Implementation With Field Actors: The Only

Here is the list trainings and these spreadsheets. It’s still very good on paper and with the intention. After a few years spent working with public administrations, I think that this is much too complex for the added value and the quality of information returned. Beautiful calculations are useless if fundamental data is not present or modeled. And in the administrations, the reality of the field, of the agents, their state of mind, their motivation, these are key data. To ignore them is to decide with completely and deeply biased information. The impression I have is that decades of operation of the French administrative machine (since the post-war period)


have completely sedimented the behavior of actors and the mental models of the administration. Decision-makers decide without knowledge of the field, Implementation with field actors: the only strategy that works? In this context, it seems that the effectuation , popularized in France by Philippe Silberzahn , is a strategy that works to implement changes in public administration. Why ? let us take again the five principles of the realization according to Saint Philippe: 1) Start with what you have: Administrations have often done things right to left, sometimes buried but which can be reactivated. Often administrations would have a great

Reason In Acceptable Loss And 3) Obtain Commitments

interest in recovering what worked with their peers in other more or less comparable ministries or administrations. This is not a quick fix, it is surely not ideal. However, often with adaptations, improvements this proves to be a good starting point that avoids asking too many questions. Once again, we should not idealize and expect everything from the solution or the organization put in place in such and such an allegedly comparable administration, but it is a good starting point … to start a long road. 2) Reason in acceptable loss and 3) Obtain commitments On any project, administrations can test ideas, put things

in place and draw a factual assessment. To do this, we must give primacy to the ideas of field agents and stop promoting only cathedral projects that have emerged from the fertile imagination of decision-makers. And above all, you have to know how to make factual assessments. Too often the balance sheets in the public sector only serve to drag failures under the carpet or to dress the bride so as not to harm the career of such and such. I can assure you that when you present a report and you say “it does not work, it does not bring the expected results” everyone looks at you with round eyes as if since the death of the late Jean-Pierre Coffe, they had never again heard anyone dare to say clearly “This is m …” 3) Obtain

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.