There must be an acceptable way of making decisions and abiding by the rules. What will happen if people make their own rules as in KL, parking their cars where they like, double parking, breaking speed limits,jumping red lights, tail-gating etc without consideration for others , then the place will not be a safe place to live. Rules need to be enforced , it is better than none, rules of course can always be improved if the result is a good intention and adds value.This is the concept of COMPLIANCE in the workplace and society.
This is the practice in industry called PEER EVALUATION . IMHO, the trainees (users) know best. People viewing at things as outsiders know less than the trainees (users) who are actually under the coach. Some examples (related to things outside Badminton coaching); 1. Top manufacturers say that this racket is the best racket in the world (newest material, technology, etc......), but players (users) may find it not suitable for them. 2. Top chefs awarded this dish as the most delicious dish (best ingredients, expensive ingredients, etc......), but eaters (users) may find it tasteless. 3. Top teachers say that this new teacher just recruited should be the best teacher in their school (highest qualifications, very experienced, etc......), but students (users) may find lectures boring. 4. Top film reviewers voted for this film as the best film this year (best acting, best story, etc......), but movie-goers (users) may find it dull. 5. Top fashion designers voted for this dress as the most beautiful dress (newest design, latest fashion, etc......), but wearers (users) feel they don't look good in it. .
Like I said, committees members can be appointed or voted in. Everything can be fine tuned and improved. Remember the 90s case of Leeson who was not subject to any form of check and balances in making company's investments, he bankrupted the whole (was it Barings) because he did not have to report to anyone and no one checked on him. Would you want to run an organisation like that, no check and balance?
Leeson didn't need a committee to rein him in. He got to do what he did because of greed up and down the line in Barings regardless of their public position. Only, he took the fall. You cannot trade to the limit if you are not given the powers to trade to the limit. I totally agree with the point about checks and balances; my issue however, is of use, misuse and abuse by any system. And manipulation of the system. But back to Misbun. Whoever cannot appreciate what he has achieved for Malaysia is "not all there" IMO.
1,2,4 & 5 has one very clear distinction from 3. 1,2,4,5 is about satisfying customers. 3, is not necessarily that, it is more about maintaining standards, at least in the UK system which is subject to Quality Audit. In Malaysia we have an MQA to monitor and audit the quality of programs not to make students happy, but mainly to maintain the standards of graduates to a reasonable standard.Education in USA,Australia or Canada may not be so commercialised.(corporatised if you like).
I doubt if anyone is unable to see his work on LCW. There's is simply too much attention heaped on him. What about the other coaches like Rexy, Tan Kim Her, Sun Cen Hua, Jeremy , Wong Tat Meng, etc.etc. , they are all part of the team that built the Msia team, it is also a team effort. Didn't Li Mao comment about the lack of Collaboration amongsts departments in team events? To be great one needs to be able to accept constructive criticisms with an open mind so that there will be continuous improvement.Of course baseless criticisms are best ignored, but one should not recognise also some shortcomings of everyone.One should also be ready always to see other peoples' points of view and collaborate with them, I think this is called Team Spirit.
Trainees/students are wiser than we think they are . It's not satisfying customers and/or maintaining standards that I am talking about. It's how the players feel what they can get from their coach. Our Melbourne University here is regarded by top academics worldwide as one of the top universities in the world. But would I listen to them or listen to students studying there? IHMO, trainees/students (the users) are wiser than what we think they are. Even here at BC, our readers are wiser than us stating our different theories, ideas and/or comments. They may be remaining silent, but they (the users) know whether we are talking rubbish or not. Again, it's up to them, the users, to decide. .
One should also know when it is time to stop wasting tie with people who have nothing positive to contribute, or who are more of a hindrance. And if that is not possible, to exit from such a situation. Other coaches have nothing taken away from them in terms of recognition. But should MS be blamed if their contribution is deemed to be "less" than his in any way by some people? The team effort is also dependant on whether team efforts are encouraged. It did not appear to be so. Again, this was not because of Misbun. It was because of the policies that had been instituted. But I think you should know more about this than I do.
Therefore, when Misbun thinks it's not a good system, he decides to leave . That's what I meant in my previous posts. The TCC introduced a so called 'new' system. Therefore, when Misbun, the user of the system, thinks it's not a good system, he decides to leave. Here, some players, the users of the coaches, think that Misbun's system is better. Therefore, they are thinking of following Misbun to leave BAM. The TCC brought in these new policies without consulting with their users (coaches and players). There is no such thing as 'team effort'. The TCC wanted to be boss and said to everyone: "You just do it the TCC way". .
Not consulting users is not correct, you have to check Era's revelelation who the members of the TCC. Misbun is one of them.
I agree with you on the last para.We are free to state our views.Readers deciding who to believe is an eg. of Peer Evaluation.
I also agree with you on Melbourne U but you also need to be aware that many Us dont operate like that, they are more commercial and are not discerning when accepting students, they have other motives, then students dont know what they want and become a hindrance.
To be honest I dont. It may be because of the concept and mindset of "corporatisation". But not to discredit MS even his family say that he can be a bit eccentric. In 1980 he walked out of the BAM and coach Tan Yee Khan because he disliked his training and instead trained on his own presumably with Eddy.That was when BAM was a loose ,small outfit where everybody knew each other and no one checked on each other. If I remember rightly his career was in doldrums until 1986,where he entered the final. From then on his career shot up and his lack of fitness was past. Not much was achieved in Msian badminton until 1992. I think this corporisation set-up was done @1998 prior to the Commonwealth Games. Now this is one area where my memory is quite hazy and needs a lot of refreshing. But I would recommend that we no longer mention Misbun as weeks ago he already appealed in the press to leave him alone and in peace.Let's leave him alone, and say neither good or bad, enough has been said already until we are repeating ourselves, lets' discuss whether the BAM knows what it is doing and along the way give it some breathing space.
The suggestions made by Misbun (the hands-on coach) weren't accepted . Yes, most of us knew that. The final outcome was that suggestions made by Misbun (the hands-on coach) weren't accepted. That's why Misbun has decided to quit. .
Be aware that many us dont operate like that . I believe both university and students know what they themselves want (separately). As long as their wants are not clashing (like this BAM-vs-MS case), no big drama will unfold. .
LOL The more I hear about Misbun the more I like and admire the man. Here is a guy who obviously has the courage of his convictions, and follows his convictions. Unlike many others who just blindly follow or go along with any majority. To discover something new or a better way, you have to often walk a lonely path. You will not find any corporate bean counters on that path!
When we make judgments on whether a system is working properly,we should also look at the internal problems such as size,mindset ,culture , type of operations etc. At the same time we should do some environmental scanning as to external factors influencing the choice of systems. It so happens today that Msia wants to upgrade itself to a first world country and wants to adopt systems on par with countries like China,Korea,Japan ,US etc. East Asian countries like China have become the world's factories and many arts and crafts have been reduced to a science. In US a simple burger outlet can become an international chain because it practices systems engineering, there are no secrets ,every work process is analysed ,reduced to a set of written procedures and compiled in a staff manual. Every time you start work there is no training ,just read the manual and start from step1.This manual is used all over the world and if everyone follows it, you get the same burger anywhere.This bring out consistency and quality in the product, it is not a secret kept in the head of anyone. It is possible that badminton has already or is in the process of being engineered like that.If the person is not trained in this change mindset he would not be able to cope with the stress of having to write reports, write down his processes, write SWOT anlayses etc. etc.All these systems are turning Arts into sciences, even when you go to hospital you are treated a patient to be cured , rather a product to be serviced to fit the routines and availability of the system. The 2nd challenge here in Msia is that governance and transparency.Here in Msia when you are using public funds and funds from GLC's like Maybank and Proton, all dealings have to be proper and above board and follow guidelines set out.Once an executive steps out of line anyone can report him to the MACC of graft and the officer will have to spend time in the MACC interrogation room. Both are what is called Benchmarking ,set standards comparable with the rest of the world and other industries. I think it was first pioneered by the US and Europe and goes by some fancy name "Business Process Re-engineering or BPR for short. Like I said this is in response to external environmental influences and vary from country to country and region to region.
Then I think you made a good choice in Melbourne. And dont forget that there is an International Ranking for the best 200 or so Us, guess how they do the evaluation?
"corporate bean counters on that path" Ha,ha I like that. I hate them too but I manged to survive 3 decades working under such people. But they are not all bean counters, there are also "systems engineers" analysing and arranging work processes and estimating the value of each process and the overall operations and demanding me writing down all the processes, giving them values and continuously improving on them. Tons of paperwork and meetings!
I think you're missing the point. No one can dispute that your knowledge of business processes and corporate structure and their raisons d'etre are very in-depth. But the real question here is: which processes have been checked, tested and found fundamentally correct for implementation at BAM in the current form of the association? Who has been involved in the project? What are their credentials and wha experience do they bring to the table? Is someone driving an attempt at a consunsus? Is there valid and justifiable disagreement to some important concepts that are being attempted? Just being reactive to the industrialized and "advanced" nations and their pre-occupation and fascination with "process" and "corporate" and "documentation" and "standardization" is not necessarily the correct way to do things. All systems are misused, abused, mismanaged, corrupted and mangled. The more "in-depth" and "comprehensive" the more chances of this happening. Eventually all that you have described, is about control. In every sense of the word. Art and talent cannot flourish in that atmosphere. Only mediocrity.
