[quote user="zardoz"]
[quote user="selectorThe phrase used by the morally bankrupt to justify the way they treat their subordinates is, "Nothing personal, it's just business". To me, that speaks volumes about their philosophy.
Too often, the ends do not justify the means.
[/quote]
Very true...because it's always personal..
Some late thoughts.
In the best of circumstances, changing a business from government ownership to privite ownership is not culture change, rather culture shock. In the former, the bosses are politicians with a focus on people and their votes. Obviously, private ownership puts the focus on the bottom line and in the course of the transition, people lose their livelyhood or, for those who keep a job, find they are expected to do much more with less resources. It is no surprise that criticism will be bitter. Much of the criticism may be valid, but it is hard for an insider to be objective and harder for an outsider to get to the details of the matter to make an accurate assessment.
Very few people possess the skill to manage such a change and still have the general apporval of the rank and file. Conrail's Stanley Crane comes to mind. It is clear that Harrison won't ever win a popularity contest and only time will tell whether his strategy will prove to have worked for the longer term. Allegations that assets are not being replaced as they are used up would give one pause.
When I worked on the shipper side, one of the first things I was taught was to be very careful with complaints about carrier service. Get on the wrong side of the local trainmaster, and consider yourself lucky if your switch shows up on time, or his buddy, the local mudchicken, doesn't come up with a long list of defects on the plants tracks. And I guarantee, having your complaint written up with attribution in a widely circulated publication that covers the business will dramaticly reduce returns to your e- and voice mail messages.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
CN has been a corporation for almost 15 years now..that ship sailed long ago. Any adjustments from crown corp. status to corporate status happened long ago. I don't think there's alot of featherbedding going on at CN..everything I read tells me they are running a tight ship...maybe even too tight given what some of the operating people are saying.
CN's change from public to private ownership happened and was over long before Hunter Harrison came onto the scene, so that's not what the problem is here. Instead, that was accomplished when Paul Tellier was CEO. Significantly, Tellier had never held a private sector job before then, either - he was a lawyer who had 'maxed out' by rising to the top of the Canadian federal bureaucracy as Chief of Staff of the Privy Council [or similar - apologies to our Canadian members, whose governmental structure I fear I have just mis-named, mangled, or worse]. So maybe it was better, because Tellier could legitimately take the moral high ground position of not asking anyone to do something that he wasn't also - Tellier could in effect say - 'Hey - I'm making this transition to a for-profit culture right along with the rest of you'.
The problem with the advice that jeaton was given when he was on the shipper side is this - 'OK, then what recourse or means of redress are you left with to fix things that are clearly wrong [Q]' If fear of retribution - legitimate or not - means that you've been silenced, it ain't ever gonna get better, fella, unless you've got some other method in mind, such as bribery or favors of some sort, or intercession by higher-ups [which also often cause the retribution], etc. Now to be fair, jeaton said 'be very careful . . . [don't] Get on the wrong side', not 'Don't ever complain', which does leave some room for legitimate gripes - we hope, as contrasted with just cutting off incessant whining and begging by shippers. But if the channels of reasonable communication are blocked, then the pressure will build until it blows in some uncontrolled and unforseen manner - like a boiler that's had its safety valve ['pops']tied down.
- Paul North.
Or worse..that nothing boils over and the customer votes with his feet and leaves without saying a word. That's how it usually happens..most don't complain...they just quietly disappear.. That's why shippers who complain should be appreciated...they are the few who WILL give the carrier a chance to make it right before calling it quits. Hopefully CN doesn't believe that their accounts have no options...because they sure do. Even shippers who depend on rail (where truck or boat isn't an option) can close up shop and move somewhere else.
On the Missabe, which the CN totally butchered, AND tried to get away with non DB units for awhile, things are pretty bad. Got rid of all the MISSABE SPECIFIC units, and brought in crappy IC units, and now wants more EJE units? The crews are much more worse off. For example, the Sat-Sun Proctor Roadswitch is run by furloughed crews. Yes furloughed crews. Which means they really arent making enough money for it to be worth it.
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Ulrich - right you are. There's almost always an alternative - not necessarily the ones you'd want, or prefer, or that are good for you and/ or the other guy - but they're out there, and if that's what it takes or what the shipper gets forced into, that's better than economic starvation or suicide.
Shifting gears ever so slightly - coborn35's post above reminded me of it again -
Reviewing the Canadian TSB's report on the 2006 Lillooet wreck above, it seems that both the lumber car and the locomotive had brakes that were at least partially defective for a variety of reasons and factors - such as a 'load indicator plate' for the 'Empty / Load Adjustment Valve' missing from the top of a truck of the lumber car. Something was also assembled wrong - a spring was mis-seated or in the wrong place, as well as others. None of this happened just before or during the wreck - they were all pre-existing conditions, which could have been caught by a routine thorough mechanical inspection, it seems to me. Since that quite evidently didn't happen, it starts to look like this kind of negligence has become habitual - or at least failure to counter-act such inattention - a common enough pre-cursor to many disasters. This raises the question of what the 'culture' there at CN has become - Is it now, 'Don't be pro-active, and just do the absolute minimum necessary' [Q]
As a result, a full-size main-line locomotive could not successfully hold back a single loaded lumber car on a 2.2 per cent grade. Doesn't that seem odd to you [Q] Even back in the day of the steam locomotives and hand brakes, they did better than that. Sure, the dynamic brakes would have prevented this, but that misses the key question of, 'What else went wrong here [Q]'
And finally - A couple months ago there was a thread here about the FRA being pretty zealous about checking car inspections at one of the former WC shops - North Fond Du Lac, if I remember correctly, for a period of several weeks. Such an action says to me that the FRA wasn't trusting the integrity of CN's inspections and quality control process for same there any more. So - Anybody here know what eventually happened with all that [Q] [I shouldn't have to draw pictures to complete my analysis here, I think.]
- Paul North
Re: Service complaints. It's not if you do it, it's how you do it. I don't know that it is all that different dealing with any vendor of goods or service.
On railroads, much of what happens is based on decisions made by the front line managers. Unless there have been dramatic changes in the last two decades, they daily have to make tough choices between who gets and who doesn't. The shipper with the biggest freight bill is always going to get a lot of attention. But if you are a shipper that is back in the pack, you probably want to keep a good working relationship with the local trainmaster. You may have contacts further up the management chain, but a very good way to find yourself at the bottom of th list is to make your first call to his boss, or better yet, the president of the company.
From what I'm seeing all the Class 1s should take a close look at what the regionals and shortlines are doing. Why is that some of these lines...once spun off to a small operator...become successful? Look at Montreal, Maine & Atlantic for example.. In the last days of CP traffic on the Shortline was pretty much dead..in the final days of ownership under CP.trains were often nothing more than a tired RS-18u..followed by boxcar and a gondola. Now there's real traffic..even some double stack on that line because MM&A is a smaller more entrpreneurial operator who is responsive to the needs of the local shippers. Same can be said for CN's old Sherbrooke and Berlin subdivisions.. Emmons (and then Gennessee and Wyoming) brought that line back to life and now it is prospering like it hasn't in at least 50 years. Marquette Rail in upstate MI is another great example of a line that floundered under CSX but is now once again prospering. Maybe huge systems with tens of thousands of employees just don't work so well.
Dan
CN is still dealing with the changes made in the 1920'a when it was converted to government from several private bankrupt lines like GTR, GTP, CNoR, National Continantal, Inter Colonial. CN was rationalized out of these companys. If I remember right CNR was already a very efficient operating tatio by the 1980's if you discounted a few lines like, Newfoundland narrow gage, PEI, Montreal comuter lines and prairy branch lines, wich they don;t have to account for now anyways. CNR had the lowest grades for a transcontinental railway in North America, this matters if the transcontinental trains are the most profitable. This takes away from Hunter's credit but....
Maybe Hunter is just in the right place at the right time and his efforts just improve the bottum line . What about Teleir ? CN worked well for him too. Thornton's consolidations at that time are still the base on CN across canada.
Maybe what jeaton is saying is the "good ole' boy" network often works with more effect and more in favor to the shipper than a complaint up the offical chain of command.
Quite offten, if it is a "one day fix" type of defect, a call or word to assistant roadmaster or to his assistant, maybe over lunch, often results in the problem being handled promptly.
Keep in mind that no matter what the road, or class of road it is, MOW resources are often thin, because major capital projects are planned 2 or 3 years in advance...it is the "emergency" repairs that throw a wrench into the works.
Not to say most roads don't have a contengincy plan for such things, but personal experience has shown me that if you start with the guys who actually swing the spike maul so to speak, you can get a lot of defects fixed quite quickly.
If it is a major problem, say a frog or switch need to be replaced, a call to your assistant roadmaster buddy will most likely get the problem on the A sheet faster than a call to superintendent...and a demanding call or letter to the super will almost always get the switch leading into your plant spiked for a good while, because offically the MOW guys always, always have a long long list of higher priority things that "have" to get done, or should have been done yesterday.
And the reverse works too...if I am working a plant, and come across a defect that merits attention right now, I normaly don't call our trainmaster or roadmaster...I usualy go find the guy in the plant responsible for the track...they may have a private contractor that does their repair or they may do their own work...when I find him, I take him out, show him the problem, and hopefully we find a way to work around it for that day.
If we have to highball the plant, I am now in a position to report to my trainmaster that A: there is a problem, B: the problem has already been brought to the plants attention, and C: this is what I was told by the plant manager the fix will be.
If we are the ones who maintain the track inside the plant, (rare to find this now) then we already have a heads up, and both the guys who needs to address the problem are now aware if it.
While the good ole boy network may seem out moded in todays business world, it is alive and well in the T&E department and the MOW department of every railroad out there...because it ulitizes assets in a fast manner...trust me, the roadmaster may not be aware he has a crew sitting around for a day or two waiting on a delivery of ties or spikes, but the assistant RM does know, and he can see the sense in sending these guys who would have spent the rest of the day drinking coffee and sitting in their trucks out on a one day fix to keep a mid level shipper happy.
No wasted time, one happy shipper, the cars keep moving and the problem solved, most of the time without a complaint of any kind needed.
23 17 46 11
Ed
You describe exactly the kind of extra effort that keeps things flowing. It is good business, but it is extra work and it deserves appreciation. So how inclined would you be to make the extra effort if the plant traffic manager had a hissy fit and called the superintendent every time something delayed the switch job and the engine showed up a little late?
Paul_D_North_Jr<snipped>As a result, a full-size main-line locomotive could not successfully hold back a single loaded lumber car on a 2.2 per cent grade. Doesn't that seem odd to you [Q] Even back in the day of the steam locomotives and hand brakes, they did better than that. Sure, the dynamic brakes would have prevented this, but that misses the key question of, 'What else went wrong here [Q]' <snipped>
<snipped>
Paul, that train is a dangerous combination due to the fact that there was only one freight car to one locomotive, and worse that one freight car exceeded 100 tons per operative brake system. Look at BNSF or UP's ETT covering operation of such a train on a similar grade like Cima Hill on the UP or Cajon on BNSF. There is no margin for error in the train handling, the safe course would have been to bring along 4 or 5 empty freight cars for extra braking effort. As for being safely done in the Steam Era, no trains in that era had freight cars approaching that weight on four axles, retainers would have been used without question, and the rules would have specifed that the train had to have added empty freight cars for additional braking effort.
zardoz ...Too often, the ends do not justify the means.
...Too often, the ends do not justify the means.
Agreed. In fact, they never do in my way of thinking...not when dealing with humans. I am a proponent of Kantian ethics and morality, so utilitarian reasoning is fraught with defects in my view. Utilitarianism is what allows us to default to "majority rules" at the expense of one or more, as long as they are in a minority.
But to supplant moral courage and reasoning with the politics of envy is not effective. That was my point in your quote of me earlier.
-Crandell
Jay,
I would put forth all the extra effort needed to make sure I found every single item that could be considered a defect...from lose joint bars or a sloppy switch to a frog with a chipped nose to debris in the toe path...and I would try my best to see if we could arrange it so that is the very last plant we work on our shift...
And then work the plant as slow as possible.
On the other hand, if the plant manager or transportation manager met me at the gate, and explained he has a serious need to receive his inbounds by 8 am because of a new shift rotation in his workforce, or some tooling set up that has to be done early...or he simply points out that we are a little later than expected, and he would like to know why so he can cover his fanny to his boss, then odds are I would go out of my way to see if there is a way to work his plant first or second, and I would make sure that information was forwarded along to the trainmaster or yardmaster in a manner that wouldn't ruffle any feathers.
For most local and switch crews, being on time or working a plant in the most efficient manner is actually a source of pride, and we do take pride in our work, because for us, this is the grass roots of railroading, this is where it all begins, spotting and pulling cars out the industries.
If it is one of those plants where you make a call as your running around your spot cars, and by the time you get shoved down to the plant gates, the gates are open and someone is there with the outbound list and your all lined up for the inbound track...well, when guys like that ask for a favor, say they need a car moved from a back track to a loadout rack because their in house switcher is broken or their track mobile is buried, then we normally take care of it for them without a fuss.
The flip side of this is if it is one of those plants where you shove down there, and no one is ever out there on time to open the gates, and you have wait around half an hour and call back several times just to get a person to come unlock the gates...well, when they need a favor like the one described above, trust me, I write down every move we have to make to get that car out, and call it all into the chief clerk, who will promptly bill them for every in plant move we make for them beyond their entitled spot move.
Just like Vegas, what happens in the field stays in the field...
Unless the problem is an obvious safety issue that is ignored, or a major disruption to service and operations, the need or desire to call in the brass is usually the last resort chosen...simply because most industries that ship by rail have been doing so for decades, and almost every issue on service and such has been worked out long ago...both the shipper and the railroad have long since worked out a routine that works best for both of us...it really is a "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" world out in the field.
Something that, in the outside world seems like a minor issue, like an anglecock left open on the rear of a 60 car outbound pull...becomes a major issue when you're the guy that has to walk the 60 cars in 100 degree heat to close it...then figure out a way to get back to the locomotive .
On the other hand, knowing the guys in the plant have laced up all the hoses and closed the rear up...well, you are a lot more inclined to work a little harder for them or make that one off the books move they might need to make their day go easier.
jeaton Ed You describe exactly the kind of extra effort that keeps things flowing. It is good business, but it is extra work and it deserves appreciation. So how inclined would you be to make the extra effort if the plant traffic manager had a hissy fit and called the superintendent every time something delayed the switch job and the engine showed up a little late?
Its interesting to see and read the different views in the way some people think of CN and Mr.Harrison.Have anyone of you ever read Mr.Harrison's book on the CN? Its called "How We Work and Why",the other is, "The Pig that Flew", by Harry Bruce. I recommend you read them both.Then you might just realize and understand what is going on.I respect Mr.Harrison,and I wouldnt mind shaking his hand, and asking for his autograph,to be put in my book he wrote.What Mr.Harrison has done to CN and the other railroads merged into it,was for many reasons.Any of you feel that you could run CN any better,even in todays economic status?I sure would like to see you try.Granted I have heard ALOT of complaining from both sides of the fence on CN ....more than anyone will ever know.The biggest problem with CN and the other railroads is lack of people,and in some cases, its sad,but some people that just dont really care.Some, if not most of us work 8 -10 hour shifts.These CN workers put in 12 very long, and tiring hours..then are suppose to have the remaining time off, till they are called for their next job assignment.It doesnt work that way at times.I've seen CN people work 7 days straight with out a break,due to some other worker,not showing up for their shift,lack of a worker(s),or someone not qualified to do the job at hand.Yet what is ironic is that,yes they complain about the work they do,or cars that should be sent elsewhere,that are being returned back to the originating yard due to no capacity at the other yard.In some cases these rail cars sit in a siding for days on end.Then there are trains "Dead On the Law ",and in sidings due to NO qualified engineers,or conductors,to operate them,or in other cases,air lines frozen in long trains in winter,yard masters that have a hard time, where to put freight cars, in a congested yard,a locomotive running out of fuel,or a mechanical problem that was unavoidable.Then theres the locomotives that are generally not working properly themselves,or customers that cant or dont have room for the cars they need / or ordered to their plant, due to problems with their workforce, or other factors.It makes me sick when I hear people berating Mr.Harrison,CN,and everything that this railroad has tried to accomplished.If you dont like CN,then railfan at another railroad.If you work for CN and dont like what your doing....then quit.There is at least someone else out there, that wouldn't mind doing your job and get satisfaction from doing what they do best.....run a railroad....and thats what it should be after all.Yes there is going to be problems with a railroad.....always has been..always will.No railroad is perfect.You want to complain how this or any other railroad is running,then blame the government,blame everyone,not just one single individual.
cnwfan2 [snip] Have anyone of you ever read Mr.Harrison's book on the CN? Its called "How We Work and Why",the other is, "The Pig that Flew", by Harry Bruce. I recommend you read them both. [snipped]
Minor correction - The Pig That Flew has nothing to do with Mr. Harrison, as it pre-dates IC's and hence his appearance on CN by several years. Instead, it is mainly about CN CEO Paul Tellier and the mid-1990s privatization of CN.
I do believe that Mr. Harrison has written a 2nd book, with a similar title, but I'm having trouble finding that title or other reference quickly. It's probably in this month's Trains article, but that issue is at home today . . .
On the EJ&E, CN overcharged USS to the point where USS had enough with CN. USS now relies on IHB for switching instead of CN. They also stalled on the hill out of Joliet twice in a week because of underpowering trains and started brush fires in Crest Hill and Plainfield.
cnwfan2 Its interesting.........one single individual.
Its interesting.........one single individual.
I think we have the TRAINS magazine, and many other journals, to thank for the lack of respect for the period. Lots of white space around the border, and sometimes borders within borders, but no space after a period.
Being an amateur type setter, I always used an em quad at the end of a sentence and an en quard after a comma. Nowadays, with my eyesight on the wane, I have to read every other sentence twice as they seem to be run-ons, like many of the posts here. I think the paragraph should be re-instated.
But lack of respect is the essence of this epoch. Crossing gates, customers, you name it are in Rodney Dangerfield's camp: "I don't get no respect."
Art
I have a few comments to this thread:
RWM
Railway Man I have a few comments to this thread: Responsibility can't be parsed. The man at the top owns the successes and the failures equally. I have a lot more respect for the man who takes $1 and builds it into $1.1 million than the man who takes $1 million and builds it into $1.1 million. Before we giddily celebrate success of a man, I think we would want to carefully analyze what the man was given for bank when he started. Railways are a long-term business. The measure of a railway man may not be known even during his lifetime. Some leaders have seemed pretty good during their time but when we look back a decade or two later, we can see their success was impermanent and their policies petty. I can look back into my career and see lasting value created by men such as Kenefick, Holtman, Krebs, Jenks, Walsh, Crane, Claytor, and see value destroyed by some others. Some of our leaders we have good regard for today will still be remembered positively a quarter-century from now, some will have been forgotten, and some will be deeply regretted. Positive press during a railway man's career is a poor guide to true value. The example is Stuart Saunders, Railroader of the Year twice, whose irresponsibility and failure to make the tough choices nearly destroyed the industry. Contemporaneously, Downing Jenks, never a darling of the press, never a Railroader of the Year, did more to regenerate railroading than any man of his era through his insistence on management training and an iron-clad insistence that everyone was personally responsible for everything they touched. The Jenks culture was the framework on which the rebirth of railroading occurred after 1980. RWM
I have been associated with railroading as an employee and a still interested and involved retiree for 54 years. It was my privelege and duty to work closely with upper middle managers and two CEO's. My associates with whom I still visit and communicate can recite both the good and bad. We take pride about the significant things we participated in, and also talk about the boondogles. You, RWM, are RIGHT ON with your submission.
Los Angeles Rams Guy For the most part, I like what CN has been able to do with the former IC/ICG Iowa Division and making it look like something again although I am disappointed that they haven't pushed for a paired track arrangement with UP between Denison and Council Bluffs AND pushed the Council Bluffs/Omaha gateway harder; particularly for auto and auto parts traffic.
For the most part, I like what CN has been able to do with the former IC/ICG Iowa Division and making it look like something again although I am disappointed that they haven't pushed for a paired track arrangement with UP between Denison and Council Bluffs AND pushed the Council Bluffs/Omaha gateway harder; particularly for auto and auto parts traffic.
I agree with you LA Rams Guy. Two reasons I can only speculate on why auto traffic is not seen on the Iowa line is:
A. Long haul revenues may not be sufficient to make it worth shipping from Michigan to Council Bluffs or
B. There may be tunnel clearance issues at East Dubuque, IL that won't allow Auto racks and stacks to pass through.
However, I am no expert on railroading, just a fan.
Jeff
Well having served in the military. It is not unusual that 30-40% of the people under a strong leader will dislike the leader in one way or another. It's very rare that you have broad popular support across the board. Popularity is NOT how you measure Leadership in the military or the civilian business world. You measure effective leadership by how many subordinates follow you and help you meet your goals. You never measure it on public complaining. subordinates will complain BUT they will still follow you if your a good leader and they respect you. So the complaining is really not a measure of anything. Thats probably why Hunter Harrison, if he is smart, disregards the complaining. If the complaining is serious then a good leader will spot it via the Organization starting to miss some goals and/or a legitimate morale problem developing.
On the complaining topic:
I rode the VIA Rail Skeena about 5 years ago and the entire crew was ripping on Hunter Harrison. They alleged.....He was ripping up their good rail so that it could be shipped South and used in the United States, he was making work rule changes that imperiled safety, he wasn't listening to long-time "Canadian" employees, etc. Most of the crew was from points in Eastern Canada. Not sure why they were so far West.
Anyhow, I pointed out to them that the CN was a basket case financially before Hunter Harrison took over. Also, said that if Canadians were so great at running any business why were there Americans in or very near the top spot of most of their transportation companies, Airlines and Otherwise (silence). CN had the opportunity to hire a Canadian for the top spot but choose an American South of the Border for a reason. The reason had to do with a particular skill or leadership quality they could not find anywhere North of the border. Let's face it, it's easier to hire domestically if you can.
Anyhow the train crew had no rebuttal but then switched the subject to how President Bush was running the Iraq war at the time, which apparently they have not been in contact with a lot of Americans and they wanted an opinion. They didn't like my opinion on that subject either. Despite their political discussions the VIA Rail Crew was professional and treated us respectfully and friendly regardless of the discussions. One could argue they never should have breached either subject BUT Canadians are friendly people and like to talk exploratively about a whole range of issues, it's part of their culture. None of it bothered me and I told them when they asked permission to breech the subjects it was OK by me.
EJE818 On the EJ&E, CN overcharged USS to the point where USS had enough with CN. USS now relies on IHB for switching instead of CN. They also stalled on the hill out of Joliet twice in a week because of underpowering trains and started brush fires in Crest Hill and Plainfield.
The brush fires have nothing to do with the CN taking over the J. They were started with ex J SD38s, and the J was know for doing the same thing along that strech. Also as an employee for a class one in Chicago, I can tell you that all of our traffic for USS gets handed off to the CN, and not the Harbor.
An "expensive model collector"
diningcar Railway Man I have a few comments to this thread: Responsibility can't be parsed. The man at the top owns the successes and the failures equally. I have a lot more respect for the man who takes $1 and builds it into $1.1 million than the man who takes $1 million and builds it into $1.1 million. Before we giddily celebrate success of a man, I think we would want to carefully analyze what the man was given for bank when he started. Railways are a long-term business. The measure of a railway man may not be known even during his lifetime. Some leaders have seemed pretty good during their time but when we look back a decade or two later, we can see their success was impermanent and their policies petty. I can look back into my career and see lasting value created by men such as Kenefick, Holtman, Krebs, Jenks, Walsh, Crane, Claytor, and see value destroyed by some others. Some of our leaders we have good regard for today will still be remembered positively a quarter-century from now, some will have been forgotten, and some will be deeply regretted. Positive press during a railway man's career is a poor guide to true value. The example is Stuart Saunders, Railroader of the Year twice, whose irresponsibility and failure to make the tough choices nearly destroyed the industry. Contemporaneously, Downing Jenks, never a darling of the press, never a Railroader of the Year, did more to regenerate railroading than any man of his era through his insistence on management training and an iron-clad insistence that everyone was personally responsible for everything they touched. The Jenks culture was the framework on which the rebirth of railroading occurred after 1980. RWM Thanks RWM, we needed to hear (see) that. I have been associated with railroading as an employee and a still interested and involved retiree for 54 years. It was my privelege and duty to work closely with upper middle managers and two CEO's. My associates with whom I still visit and communicate can recite both the good and bad. We take pride about the significant things we participated in, and also talk about the boondogles. You, RWM, are RIGHT ON with your submission.
Business owners and/or manage very seldom create anything of lasting value that transcends the businesses we run. You may be a great leader and a great manager...but none of that will matter to anyone once the business is gone. Look at some of the great business leaders of the 50s and 60s...Langdon of B&O is a great example. He was a apparently a great leader at B&O...a great innovator at B&O..and did great things...for B&O shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders. However B&O has been gone for years and I really doubt if anything that Langdon did 40 years ago can be recognized and identifed as uniquely his at CSX today. Same with Hunter..and all the rest of us who are employed as managers today... if we're good we create value TODAY for the businesses we run and hopefully hand off the business to the next generation in better shape than we found it.. but that's it... Want to create lasting value? Then write a great book that people will still want to read in hundreds of years from now..or invent something.
Ulrich [Business owners and/or manage very seldom create anything of lasting value that transcends the businesses we run. You may be a great leader and a great manager...but none of that will matter to anyone once the business is gone....
[Business owners and/or manage very seldom create anything of lasting value that transcends the businesses we run. You may be a great leader and a great manager...but none of that will matter to anyone once the business is gone....
Long before the business itself is gone, as soon as there is a leadership change everything changes. Many businesses or thier products rarely last a generation if that long. At least not in the same form as when first started.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
I think Hunter's success is living off of Telier's, the CEO prior to H. And Thornton from as long ago as the 1920's still has a strong effect on CN today. Just look at the connecting line from Longlac to Nakina. This conection makes the CN physicaly a cost effective railroad to run over a long time.
Oh there's no doubt that legacy goes a long way. Especially if you did everything totally right or totally wrong! If it is right, then the next leader can just manage and build on and off of what you did. If it is wrong, then what you did has to be eliminated or drastically change. OR maybe you were a good operations person and now the joint needs some acquisitions or be merged or sold off and so one expert in that field is brought in. In this case, meeting the age limit, it is a forced change and depending upon the disposition of the selection of the new leader, there might be a caretaker of the status quo, a fighter to continue the legacy, or a fighter that goes in a completely different direction with our without the board and stockholders wonts. Then there are factors such as the market place, the economy, the competition or competitors, and politics, to name a few things that can change things anyway!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.