|
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Fountain management review based on 'anecdotal evidence' First, people need to understand what we have done, and are doing with this management review. We had never taken on such a project and we did not want to put out some request for proposal that would not get answers to the questions that need to be answered. We chose to implement a two-phase process. The first phase was designed to gather information necessary for developing our actual management review process (Phase II). Evergreen Solutions, LLC was tasked to get a high-level snapshot of how Fountain operates and conduct some initial interviews with Council, staff, and the community. Look at what Evergreen said in the report, “A key component in the Evergreen methodology is the use of qualitative tools to uncover perceptions and issues that are held by management and rank and file employees. In addition to interviews with key management personnel, Evergreen consultants use two primary tools to capture the thoughts and impressions of employees; department head interviews and employee focus groups. The use of these tools provides our consultants with anecdotal data—nonstatistical input used as a guide for further statistical analysis.” This is what Evergreen said about the review process, “It was the intent of the City of Fountain for the Phase I Management Study to identify anecdotal findings and establish recommendations for comprehensive reviews to be conducted in Phase II of the project.” Chapter 3 is information gathered through all the meetings, surveys, interviews, and such and is simply Evergreen restating what they were told by people. This is the part that has caused so much contention. People have taken the information from Chapter 3 and claimed Evergreen said it is true. Again, don’t take me wrong, I am by no means saying everything in Chapter 3 is untrue or that I don’t believe any of it is true – I expect most of it is. What I am saying is use caution when you accept the information provided – without investigation by the auditor – as fact. Evergreen was VERY careful in their presentation to Council to point out the fact that they did NOT investigate any of the information provided nor did they support any of the information as fact. They simply provided the anecdotal evidence as a starting point for whichever firm we chose to complete the second phase – the investigative phase – of the management review. Have you looked up the definition of “anecdotal”? Webster’s (Dictionary.com) defines it as, “based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation: anecdotal evidence.” American Heritage Dictionary defines anecdotal as, “Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: ‘There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems.’” Chapter 3 of the report provided by Evergreen Solutions only contains anecdotal evidence obtained during interviews of city staff, leaders, and members of our community. Does this mean everyone who was involved lied about what they said? Absolutely not! Does it mean that everything that was said was factual, accurate, and determined to be true by the firm conducting the audit? No again. Do I believe there are a lot of things the City can do better? Of course! If I didn’t think we had room for improvement, why would I be such a staunch supporter of continuing this review process? Let’s be clear about what we are doing, and what has been done to date. Evergreen Solutions, LLC was hired to conduct a “Management Review” of Fountain. This was not some detailed “audit” where an auditor takes out a magnifying glass and starts looking for problems. Phase I was tasked to identify things that need to be reviewed in Phase II. Phase II will dig into and uncover the truth about the things identified as potential problems in Phase I. So stop calling things reported in Chapter 3 as “findings” as in “findings of fact.” Be clear that the report simply listed “anecdotal findings” – of which many may be true while others are not. Next, stop pretending I am dismissing all the information in Phase I as hearsay – and that I give it no credence. By definition, the information in Chapter 3 IS hearsay – but that doesn’t mean I don’t give it any credence. If I didn’t give any credence to the anecdotal findings in Phase I, then why would I want to spend the money to conduct the second phase? Be real. I believe we have areas that need improvement and other areas where we excel – we were not deemed an “All America City” for nothing you know. And where on Earth did anyone get the idea that I don’t support the employees of the City of Fountain??? I think we have a great group of dedicated employees who faithfully serve our community – I support them 100%. Do I think they need the opportunity to anonymously voice their concerns? Yes, there are many rumors I have been told that rank and file employees fear for their jobs when they express disconcert with City leadership. Anonymous surveys and private interviews allow staff to express their concerns without any fear of reprisal. I believe, if you review previous Council meetings, I insisted we have anonymous surveys as part of our management review. Again from the report, “Employees can also take satisfaction in the fact that their issues were heard and can have greater ownership in the study, thus improving employee confidence in the study’s results.” And as we move forward with Phase II their input will continue to be very important as Evergreen investigates the good, the bad, and the ugly. We live in a great city – one we should all be proud of. Having a management review of our processes, policies, practices and a strategic overview of how we run this city and spend the tax payers money will allow us to move forward with better clarity of what we do well as well as where we can improve – and most importantly, what actions we must take to do things better in the future. If anyone wishes to contact me directly to discuss my views – or any City matter – please email me at Darell@DarellCraighead.com or call my cell phone at 339-3443. Darell Craighead Get involved - join the City Code review task force As I have been in favor of this type of review I applaud the Councils decision. Now that this issue is formally before the City Council I would encourage the residents of Fountain to get involved by applying to be a member of the task force, contacting your council member with your views, or coming to a City Council meeting. The only way that the City can have a balanced code is if the residents of Fountain share what they feel should be included in the City’s code. Norman Chapin
|
