X : Thoughts on Starmer?
Me : He seems to be doing fine. It's important to uphold the highest standards of office given the cesspool of chumocracy, bullying, unbecoming attempts to influence a judge, one rule for them, exam fiasco, contract questions ... the list is long.
X : Isn't Labour having a civil war?
Me : No. There is some disagreement, there has been an unfortunate attempt to curtail discussion, there's the usual rumours of purging mostly egged on by popular press (well, they have column inches to fill) but most believe in a broad church.
X : Corbyn?
Me : A symbol of anti-racism and a hero to many in the party. I'm quietly confident Starmer will bring all back into the church. It is what Labour does.
X : Blairite purges?
Me : Like the left wing purges? Mostly phantasmal and inventions of a vitriolic press.
X : But there have been suspensions.
Me : There are always suspensions. The nature of a broad church is occassionaly disagreements become a bit heated. That is far from a civil war, far from a co-ordinated effort ... stop listening to the shrill of purge or the shouts of war.
... instead look at the passion, the desire to make a change that exists in our broad church. If any lessons should be learned it's that as uncomfortable as it is, discussion is good and necessary.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
X : Tips on introducing pioneer - settler - town planner (PST)?
Me :
Step 1. A five year ban on any re-organisation.
Step 2. Spend five years fixing your doctrine (see attached).
Step 3. Now you can talk about PST.
X : Do you think people will listen?
Me : Probably not. Execs often want magic easy fixes and people think re-organisation gives them that, it's a quick hit. Just say "no" to re-organisation.
X : How do you know that doctrine is right?
Me : I don't. It's all derived from mapping, even the phases are built on it. But it's called Wardley's doctrine because it is my doctrine. If it doesn't work, blame me, it's my name on it. Maybe someone will find a better list.
X : Do you think brexit could be successful?
Me : Many paths can be taken. I don't know what the plan is.
X : Example?
Me : Subdivide the UK into four regions with each region having a specific FTA - i.e. EU / RCEP / US / Commonwealth and cross border trade internally?
X : Would that work?
Me : It's an example of a path, an option. There are many options. Some will work, otherwise will not for various practical, political and legal reasons. I do not know what the path we've chosen is.
X : Be a global trading nation?
Me : That's just a statement of intent. A bit like leaving was just an action. Behind this there will be options, plans and many calculations. Endless rounds of scenario planning over the last four years ... I would expect this to be the case.
X : Why do you think Gov is better at efficiency than the private sector?
Me : Let us qualify that with "on average". The reason why I take this view is observation. I would argue the cause is challenge i.e. in Gov you have systems like NAO, MPA and Spend Control etc.
I cannot emphasise enough the importance of pre-mortem challenge and post-mortem learning ideally using the same mechanism of communication.
The post mortem learning (if using the same mechanism of communication) helps improve the pre-mortem challenge, the pre-mortem challenge (whether the advice is followed or not) helps provide the base from which we learn.
X : Did you see this about Sunak and the conflict of interests? - theguardian.com/politics/2020/…
Me : I have now. Ho hum. We did vote in a party which is built on almost no integrity whatsover. Wake me up when a minister gets caught with a briefcase stuffed with cash and diamonds.
X : You don't seem very fussed?
Me : Ignoring law, one rule for them, special contract procedures, bullying, pressure on judges, non disclosure ... there are no standards in public life with this lot. But we've got many more years of this. Just catalogue it in the list.
X : What do you think will happen?
Me : Sunak? Nothing. They'll argue it was a clerical error or something like that, the fault of someone else. My only interest is if they find the source ... is this preparation for some sort of leadership challenge or defense against it?
X : How did you create #WardleyMaps?
Me : Ah, it came to me in a flash of my incredible genius.
X : Really?
Me : No. I needed to solve a problem, I put in a lot of hard work and basically it was all down to a huge bucket load of luck ... a series of fortuitous accidents.
X : Luck?
Me : Yep. Luck and privilege generally determine most things. We obviously have this desire to believe that somehow we're special, that we live in a meritocracy in which our talent shines but ... that's mostly garbage ... actually, it's pretty much all garbage.
X : So, if you were born on a council estate then ...
Me : I was born on a council estate. I did go to Cambridge. But then that's my generation, I imagine it's vastly harder for kids these days. I had a lot of luck. Smartest person I know worked as a road sweeper ...
X : In your culture map ...
Me : This one?
X : Yep, that one. Where are things like music, fashion etc?
Me : Enablement systems.
X : What are those?
Me : Mechanisms by which we spread and control the perception of our values.
X : Explain ...
... enablement systems include everything from the town hall meeting to the online propaganda campaign. The music and fashion industries are routinely used throughout history to promote values or suppress values from the once popular protest song to the bland misdirection.
X : Bland misdirection?
Me : Feel good songs take your mind of things that are happening. Don't underestimate the role of music, fashion and the entire creative arts in enslaving a population.
X : They are expressions of freedom!
Me : Only when that's a value of your collective.