The moment writer Fahd Al-Khitan described Jordanian management as 'cowardly' due to its hesitation in making fateful decisions, this label opened the door to dissecting one of its most prominent manifestations: the sterile policy of referring competencies into retirement. The same management that neglects to implement strategic projects on time and postpones fateful decisions—increasing their cost—is the very one that rushes to 'execute' accumulated expertise upon reaching the age of sixty, in one of the most painful paradoxes.
Here, another dilemma emerges, casting its shadow over our national performance: the management of strategic and investment projects. This management faces significant challenges related to administrative bloat and weak decision-making efficiency, leading to slow progress, wasted resources, and a decline in competitive ability. This is due to the absence of studied preliminary preparation, the failure to optimally employ qualified competencies, in addition to weak monitoring and follow-up mechanisms.
This 'cowardly management,' which avoids confrontation and fears responsibility, finds in the current retirement law an easy refuge. Instead of waging the battle for objective performance evaluation and building merit-based standards, it chooses the shortest path: applying the law literally and selectively, ignoring that humans now live longer and that experience is priceless. It is the same short-sighted mentality that causes this administrative bloat, which prefers apparent safety over calculated risk to achieve success.
A stark paradox emerges here: while the ordinary government employee is referred to retirement at age sixty, we find the judge, university professor, and doctor continuing to work. Does old age affect the government employee before others? Or does the problem lie in a deficient view that sees the employee as a number to be replaced, not an asset to be invested in? This corrective view is the same one governing the frequent ministerial reshuffles, which do not bring new blood but recycle faces that have proven their failure, as if patching a worn-out garment that has lost its value.
Referring competencies to retirement in this automatic manner is a blatant waste of energies, especially given the rise in the average age in Jordan to 75 years. Instead of these expertise being 'think tanks' that contribute to solving complex problems and developing strategies, they are shelved. This is but another facet of 'cowardice': the fear of confronting the influential and the hesitation in applying merit standards. Wise project management is not limited to financial achievement only; it is a blend of long-term planning, sound governance, and risk management. This cannot be achieved without utilizing the expertise of those who have whispered the details of projects for decades.
The crisis deepens with the mechanism of 'extension on a frayed rope,' where some have their service extended based on personal connections and quotas, while others are referred to retirement despite their competence. This selectivity is a legitimate child of 'cowardly management' and parallels the absence of clear standards in ministerial reshuffles, which lengthen the queues of retired ministers and inflate the astronomical pension bill burdening the treasury.
The claim that this policy 'saves' the treasury becomes an illusory one, as the cost of retirees reaches half a billion dinars annually. Paying a retired employee who does not work is a waste of public funds, while benefiting from their expertise is an investment with a rewarding return. It is the same logic of 'spending on popular short-term decisions' that Al-Khitan warns against, at the expense of directing resources to future projects. Success begins with prior preparation by building an accurate database, alongside selecting appropriate competencies and forming balanced work teams of experts and those with practical experience to ensure quality execution.
So, how do we transition from 'cowardly management' to 'courageous management'?
Extension Based on Competence: Through an objective and transparent performance evaluation for each case individually. Raising the Retirement Age to 65: In line with the rise in life expectancy, as in Germany (67 years) and the United States (66 years). Investing in Expertise: By appointing retired competencies as consultants with clear competitive standards, especially in managing strategic projects that require wisdom and experience. Reforming the Ministerial Reshuffle System: By establishing clear standards for competence and strategic vision, and moving away from quotas and recycling. In conclusion, the link between 'cowardly management,' 'the waste of expertise,' and 'project bloat' reveals a deep crisis in management culture. The solution lies not in populist decisions or a literal adherence to outdated regulations, but in adopting the courage to make decisions based on merit and vision. If the age of forty is the peak of mental maturity, then the expertise that reaches sixty is a precious treasure. And it is up to 'courageous management' to know how to invest this treasure in managing our national projects, instead of burying it alive in the graveyard of early retirement.
Ahmad Abdelbaset Rjoub
Researcher and strategic planner
The moment writer Fahd Al-Khitan described Jordanian management as 'cowardly' due to its hesitation in making fateful decisions, this label opened the door to dissecting one of its most prominent manifestations: the sterile policy of referring competencies into retirement. The same management that neglects to implement strategic projects on time and postpones fateful decisions—increasing their cost—is the very one that rushes to 'execute' accumulated expertise upon reaching the age of sixty, in one of the most painful paradoxes.
Here, another dilemma emerges, casting its shadow over our national performance: the management of strategic and investment projects. This management faces significant challenges related to administrative bloat and weak decision-making efficiency, leading to slow progress, wasted resources, and a decline in competitive ability. This is due to the absence of studied preliminary preparation, the failure to optimally employ qualified competencies, in addition to weak monitoring and follow-up mechanisms.
This 'cowardly management,' which avoids confrontation and fears responsibility, finds in the current retirement law an easy refuge. Instead of waging the battle for objective performance evaluation and building merit-based standards, it chooses the shortest path: applying the law literally and selectively, ignoring that humans now live longer and that experience is priceless. It is the same short-sighted mentality that causes this administrative bloat, which prefers apparent safety over calculated risk to achieve success.
A stark paradox emerges here: while the ordinary government employee is referred to retirement at age sixty, we find the judge, university professor, and doctor continuing to work. Does old age affect the government employee before others? Or does the problem lie in a deficient view that sees the employee as a number to be replaced, not an asset to be invested in? This corrective view is the same one governing the frequent ministerial reshuffles, which do not bring new blood but recycle faces that have proven their failure, as if patching a worn-out garment that has lost its value.
Referring competencies to retirement in this automatic manner is a blatant waste of energies, especially given the rise in the average age in Jordan to 75 years. Instead of these expertise being 'think tanks' that contribute to solving complex problems and developing strategies, they are shelved. This is but another facet of 'cowardice': the fear of confronting the influential and the hesitation in applying merit standards. Wise project management is not limited to financial achievement only; it is a blend of long-term planning, sound governance, and risk management. This cannot be achieved without utilizing the expertise of those who have whispered the details of projects for decades.
The crisis deepens with the mechanism of 'extension on a frayed rope,' where some have their service extended based on personal connections and quotas, while others are referred to retirement despite their competence. This selectivity is a legitimate child of 'cowardly management' and parallels the absence of clear standards in ministerial reshuffles, which lengthen the queues of retired ministers and inflate the astronomical pension bill burdening the treasury.
The claim that this policy 'saves' the treasury becomes an illusory one, as the cost of retirees reaches half a billion dinars annually. Paying a retired employee who does not work is a waste of public funds, while benefiting from their expertise is an investment with a rewarding return. It is the same logic of 'spending on popular short-term decisions' that Al-Khitan warns against, at the expense of directing resources to future projects. Success begins with prior preparation by building an accurate database, alongside selecting appropriate competencies and forming balanced work teams of experts and those with practical experience to ensure quality execution.
So, how do we transition from 'cowardly management' to 'courageous management'?
Extension Based on Competence: Through an objective and transparent performance evaluation for each case individually. Raising the Retirement Age to 65: In line with the rise in life expectancy, as in Germany (67 years) and the United States (66 years). Investing in Expertise: By appointing retired competencies as consultants with clear competitive standards, especially in managing strategic projects that require wisdom and experience. Reforming the Ministerial Reshuffle System: By establishing clear standards for competence and strategic vision, and moving away from quotas and recycling. In conclusion, the link between 'cowardly management,' 'the waste of expertise,' and 'project bloat' reveals a deep crisis in management culture. The solution lies not in populist decisions or a literal adherence to outdated regulations, but in adopting the courage to make decisions based on merit and vision. If the age of forty is the peak of mental maturity, then the expertise that reaches sixty is a precious treasure. And it is up to 'courageous management' to know how to invest this treasure in managing our national projects, instead of burying it alive in the graveyard of early retirement.
Ahmad Abdelbaset Rjoub
Researcher and strategic planner
The moment writer Fahd Al-Khitan described Jordanian management as 'cowardly' due to its hesitation in making fateful decisions, this label opened the door to dissecting one of its most prominent manifestations: the sterile policy of referring competencies into retirement. The same management that neglects to implement strategic projects on time and postpones fateful decisions—increasing their cost—is the very one that rushes to 'execute' accumulated expertise upon reaching the age of sixty, in one of the most painful paradoxes.
Here, another dilemma emerges, casting its shadow over our national performance: the management of strategic and investment projects. This management faces significant challenges related to administrative bloat and weak decision-making efficiency, leading to slow progress, wasted resources, and a decline in competitive ability. This is due to the absence of studied preliminary preparation, the failure to optimally employ qualified competencies, in addition to weak monitoring and follow-up mechanisms.
This 'cowardly management,' which avoids confrontation and fears responsibility, finds in the current retirement law an easy refuge. Instead of waging the battle for objective performance evaluation and building merit-based standards, it chooses the shortest path: applying the law literally and selectively, ignoring that humans now live longer and that experience is priceless. It is the same short-sighted mentality that causes this administrative bloat, which prefers apparent safety over calculated risk to achieve success.
A stark paradox emerges here: while the ordinary government employee is referred to retirement at age sixty, we find the judge, university professor, and doctor continuing to work. Does old age affect the government employee before others? Or does the problem lie in a deficient view that sees the employee as a number to be replaced, not an asset to be invested in? This corrective view is the same one governing the frequent ministerial reshuffles, which do not bring new blood but recycle faces that have proven their failure, as if patching a worn-out garment that has lost its value.
Referring competencies to retirement in this automatic manner is a blatant waste of energies, especially given the rise in the average age in Jordan to 75 years. Instead of these expertise being 'think tanks' that contribute to solving complex problems and developing strategies, they are shelved. This is but another facet of 'cowardice': the fear of confronting the influential and the hesitation in applying merit standards. Wise project management is not limited to financial achievement only; it is a blend of long-term planning, sound governance, and risk management. This cannot be achieved without utilizing the expertise of those who have whispered the details of projects for decades.
The crisis deepens with the mechanism of 'extension on a frayed rope,' where some have their service extended based on personal connections and quotas, while others are referred to retirement despite their competence. This selectivity is a legitimate child of 'cowardly management' and parallels the absence of clear standards in ministerial reshuffles, which lengthen the queues of retired ministers and inflate the astronomical pension bill burdening the treasury.
The claim that this policy 'saves' the treasury becomes an illusory one, as the cost of retirees reaches half a billion dinars annually. Paying a retired employee who does not work is a waste of public funds, while benefiting from their expertise is an investment with a rewarding return. It is the same logic of 'spending on popular short-term decisions' that Al-Khitan warns against, at the expense of directing resources to future projects. Success begins with prior preparation by building an accurate database, alongside selecting appropriate competencies and forming balanced work teams of experts and those with practical experience to ensure quality execution.
So, how do we transition from 'cowardly management' to 'courageous management'?
Extension Based on Competence: Through an objective and transparent performance evaluation for each case individually. Raising the Retirement Age to 65: In line with the rise in life expectancy, as in Germany (67 years) and the United States (66 years). Investing in Expertise: By appointing retired competencies as consultants with clear competitive standards, especially in managing strategic projects that require wisdom and experience. Reforming the Ministerial Reshuffle System: By establishing clear standards for competence and strategic vision, and moving away from quotas and recycling. In conclusion, the link between 'cowardly management,' 'the waste of expertise,' and 'project bloat' reveals a deep crisis in management culture. The solution lies not in populist decisions or a literal adherence to outdated regulations, but in adopting the courage to make decisions based on merit and vision. If the age of forty is the peak of mental maturity, then the expertise that reaches sixty is a precious treasure. And it is up to 'courageous management' to know how to invest this treasure in managing our national projects, instead of burying it alive in the graveyard of early retirement.
comments
Waste of expertise
display options :
Full
Main image only
without images
comments