When the Cabrera National Park was declared in 1991, a trust was established in line with national law. The trust exists to guarantee the integrity of the park, which consists also of the smaller Conills island and a series of islets as well as the surrounding sea. The president of the trust is appointed by the national government, with the environment and fisheries ministry making the proposal. There are representatives from national ministries other than environment. The development ministry is involved through transport, communications and public works. The education ministry has a role, so does tourism. And then there is the ministry of defence. Cabrera has belonged to it since 1916.
Also on the trust are three representatives of the Balearic government, one apiece from the Council of Mallorca, Palma town hall, the University of the Balearic Islands, the fishermen's brotherhood and the national institute of oceanography. There are two more - both from conservation associations.
This trust, with its diverse representation, is to be presented with a damning report from analysts. It is based on a simple technique - a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis. From what has been so far revealed of this report, there is a great deal to do with the weaknesses. Together they generate key threats - the risk posed to the park's reputation and its entire marine area.
There will be those shifting uneasily in their chairs when this report hits the table for discussion. The trust may not have operational responsibility, but it does oversee the organisation. The main question from the revealing of all the weaknesses is: what organisation? And from this stems further questions regarding efficiency and effectiveness of management, cooperation and coordination, lines of communication and centres for decision-making.
The analysis has highlighted a total mess of organisational structure, and that is because the structure is, like the trust, diverse. Its component parts comprise: the regional government, which through the environment ministry has overall responsibility for the park; government agencies and companies; Palma town hall. On top of these there is the ministry of defence, because it owns Cabrera, and Ses Salines town hall.
Administratively, Cabrera belongs to Palma. Despite the distance, it is classified as falling under the Palma municipality. Yet, let's consider what happened in February this year when the regional environment minister, Vicenç Vidal, made an announcement at the Cabrera information centre. The institute for natural areas (Ibanat), which is one of the government's agencies active in the park, was to invest just over 225,000 euros for certain infrastructure improvements. Who was to receive this money? Palma? Yes, but only some 130,000 euros. The rest was going to Ses Salines.
This division of investment made some sense in that Ses Salines was to receive aid for information signage, a cycle park and the tarmacking of a rural road: Colonia Sant Jordi is the main port that serves Cabrera. Well, it made some sense, but then it also made very little. Which is essentially the thrust of the report. There are simply too many administrations involved with Cabrera. The organisation is such that no one seems to be clear who does what or why. And when it comes to the provision of money, the budget has declined markedly since the regional government assumed control of the park some five years ago.
The report's findings hint at Cabrera being symptomatic of organisational confusion, inefficiency and ineffectiveness that affect Mallorca's coastal areas. They may not specifically be noted in the organisation or the trust, but there are yet further administrations who have their say, such as the national Costas Authority and the regional Ports Illes Balears (Colonia Sant Jordi's port is under its control).
How often do we hear of issues that stem from the involvement of all these different bodies? Cala Varques in Manacor has been a classic example, and there the Guardia Civil and National Police are adding to a mix of regional government, Council of Mallorca, town hall and Costas. There are other cases. Take Alcudia, for instance. Depending on which part of the municipality one is talking about, the town hall is involved with - and usually at loggerheads with - the Balearic Ports Authority and the Costas Authority. But then it also has to deal with the Council of Mallorca (main roads), Ports Illes Balears for its small ports of Barcares and Bonaire, the regional government, e.g. with the laying of electricity cables, and both the government and the Council of Mallorca when it comes to decisions regarding land use.
The upshot of all this is that it can be and has been that nothing gets done, while there are inbuilt mechanisms for conflict. And Cabrera appears to be one of the worst cases. A national park and an apparent symbol of everything environmentally righteous in the Balearics, and it is failed by the disorganisation created by too many organisations.
Showing posts with label Management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Management. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Lousy Review, Less Pay
Once upon a time, employees would be assessed only by their managers. This was the traditional performance appraisal, an often worthless exercise if, as happened to me on one occasion, it was conducted over a lunch at which the boss, a couple of pre-lunch G&Ts on board followed by a whole bottle of wine to himself, forgot why we were having lunch.
Other systems of appraisal were introduced. There was the upward feedback. Staff could assess the manager, a process which had inherent risks. If Employee A didn't like Manager B, then Manager B could well get a bum assessment. But the purveyors of appraisal systems would insist that these systems would filter out such subjectivity without ever truly convincing everyone that they did, and this was also the case when so-called 360-degree feedback became popular. Anyone could have his or her say. Customers, suppliers, colleagues: they could all have a pop.
These systems weren't of course a free-for-all. Bias was ironed out as much as possible. They wouldn't have been effective or have become as widespread as they did had they just been means of expressing dislike. But they were something of a culture shock for employees or managers who were to discover that there were a number of "stakeholders" whose assessment of performance fell some way short of how the employee or manager would have assessed his or her own performance.
These broader systems of appraisal were all part of a wider culture shock, that of changes to organisations' culture and their ways of doing things. By subjecting personnel to closer scrutiny by these different stakeholders, performance would improve and do so in line with new cultures that were more open to the needs of customers and others.
Into this appraisal mix came technology, and now there is the technology of social media. Customers can have their say like never before, and certain businesses are embracing this customer voice in their assessment of individuals' performance. Comments on Trip Advisor and similar websites are now being used to determine just how much people get paid.
Since the explosion of social media and review and comments' sites in particular, a whole industry of online reputation management has grown up. ReviewPro is one of the leading examples of this monitoring, and its Spanish division works with a whole host of hotel chains. Look at its clients and very familiar names appear: Meliá, Iberostar, Viva and so on.
Meliá is said to be one of the pioneers of using customer comments as part of a quality system through which performance can be measured and remuneration adjusted. Variable pay is partially determined on the basis of these comments; variable pay meaning performance pay, i.e. meeting and exceeding personal and company performance targets. At Meliá, this pay can apparently equate to as much as 20% of overall remuneration, so there is a strong incentive for management to ensure that customer satisfaction is high and also to respond in a thoughtful fashion to any negative comments.
The underlying philosophy is or should be obvious. Customers are at the heart of everything Meliá does, as is the case with any hotel chain. But how well this philosophy is understood by other chains or within Mallorca's tourism industry as a whole is open to some debate. Even among the clients that ReviewPro has, there are individual hotels which are part of certain chains that receive numerous negative comments and little or no response from management.
From surveys that Trip Advisor has done, it has been shown that responding to comments, both negative and positive, is as powerful as the comment itself. Yet, too often there are no responses and when there are they are standard ones issued not by, say, the hotel's director but by someone with a vague public relations job title.
As with any system of appraisal, using online comments is probably not foolproof. There is greater scope through social media for biased or malicious assessments than there ever was with more traditional appraisal methods. There is also the potential, once it becomes widely known that pay is directly being influenced, for online blackmail, something which does already occur. But then this is something for devisers of systems to take account of.
In principle, using customer comments is a very good tool for chains to not just monitor management and hotel performance but also to improve it as part of ongoing quality management systems. It should, therefore, be far more widely adopted by the Mallorcan tourism industry which, despite criticisms of standards, is using other methods to improve quality, the SICTED system of quality being one of them.
But there are limits to how useful such a tool is. Many negative comments stem not from poor management at specific hotels but from a lack of investment by chains which leave hotels open to such negativity.
Other systems of appraisal were introduced. There was the upward feedback. Staff could assess the manager, a process which had inherent risks. If Employee A didn't like Manager B, then Manager B could well get a bum assessment. But the purveyors of appraisal systems would insist that these systems would filter out such subjectivity without ever truly convincing everyone that they did, and this was also the case when so-called 360-degree feedback became popular. Anyone could have his or her say. Customers, suppliers, colleagues: they could all have a pop.
These systems weren't of course a free-for-all. Bias was ironed out as much as possible. They wouldn't have been effective or have become as widespread as they did had they just been means of expressing dislike. But they were something of a culture shock for employees or managers who were to discover that there were a number of "stakeholders" whose assessment of performance fell some way short of how the employee or manager would have assessed his or her own performance.
These broader systems of appraisal were all part of a wider culture shock, that of changes to organisations' culture and their ways of doing things. By subjecting personnel to closer scrutiny by these different stakeholders, performance would improve and do so in line with new cultures that were more open to the needs of customers and others.
Into this appraisal mix came technology, and now there is the technology of social media. Customers can have their say like never before, and certain businesses are embracing this customer voice in their assessment of individuals' performance. Comments on Trip Advisor and similar websites are now being used to determine just how much people get paid.
Since the explosion of social media and review and comments' sites in particular, a whole industry of online reputation management has grown up. ReviewPro is one of the leading examples of this monitoring, and its Spanish division works with a whole host of hotel chains. Look at its clients and very familiar names appear: Meliá, Iberostar, Viva and so on.
Meliá is said to be one of the pioneers of using customer comments as part of a quality system through which performance can be measured and remuneration adjusted. Variable pay is partially determined on the basis of these comments; variable pay meaning performance pay, i.e. meeting and exceeding personal and company performance targets. At Meliá, this pay can apparently equate to as much as 20% of overall remuneration, so there is a strong incentive for management to ensure that customer satisfaction is high and also to respond in a thoughtful fashion to any negative comments.
The underlying philosophy is or should be obvious. Customers are at the heart of everything Meliá does, as is the case with any hotel chain. But how well this philosophy is understood by other chains or within Mallorca's tourism industry as a whole is open to some debate. Even among the clients that ReviewPro has, there are individual hotels which are part of certain chains that receive numerous negative comments and little or no response from management.
From surveys that Trip Advisor has done, it has been shown that responding to comments, both negative and positive, is as powerful as the comment itself. Yet, too often there are no responses and when there are they are standard ones issued not by, say, the hotel's director but by someone with a vague public relations job title.
As with any system of appraisal, using online comments is probably not foolproof. There is greater scope through social media for biased or malicious assessments than there ever was with more traditional appraisal methods. There is also the potential, once it becomes widely known that pay is directly being influenced, for online blackmail, something which does already occur. But then this is something for devisers of systems to take account of.
In principle, using customer comments is a very good tool for chains to not just monitor management and hotel performance but also to improve it as part of ongoing quality management systems. It should, therefore, be far more widely adopted by the Mallorcan tourism industry which, despite criticisms of standards, is using other methods to improve quality, the SICTED system of quality being one of them.
But there are limits to how useful such a tool is. Many negative comments stem not from poor management at specific hotels but from a lack of investment by chains which leave hotels open to such negativity.
Friday, September 20, 2013
MALLORCA TODAY - Madrid seeks explanations concerning Albufera
The national environment ministry, prompted by the Balearics environmental group GOB, has sought explanations from the regional government concerning the management of the Albufera nature park in Muro and acting on recommendations for this management given by the Ramsar international secretariat for wetlands. Some specifics of this request include wanting to know if the building of the golf course on the Son Bosc finca has been definitively rejected.
See more: Ultima Hora
See more: Ultima Hora
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
The Disgrace Of Son Real
It may not have escaped your attention that I have written quite frequently about the Son Real finca in Santa Margalida. I suspect that most of you will never have been to the finca and that most of you would not normally have the slightest interest in it. Which does of course tell its own story. But interested in the finca or not, its management, or absence of management, and its recent history are the story of government organisation in a Mallorcan style. Profligate, confused, unfocussed, negligent, political. If you want a metaphor for Mallorcan government, you will find it at Son Real, not that you would find it as you wouldn't be bothered to go there.
Son Real, in terms of its volume of ancient remains, is the most important archaeological site on Mallorca. Period. Yet this most important of sites has been treated in a manner, since its acquisition by the Balearic Government in 2002, which amounts to a total and utter disgrace.
The finca was bought out of funds raised by the old eco-tax. Which is interesting in itself, as much of what should have been handed over from the tax wasn't and still hasn't been handed over because hotels which collected it have refused to. Let's give the government of the time (Francesc Antich's first PSOE-led coalition) the benefit of the doubt and accept that the eco-tax was the source of the funds. The finca cost 17.4 million euros.
It then cost a further three million euros for various works to be performed on the finca, including the old buildings that are there and the visitors' centre, a visitors' centre which has been closed for some months.
The cost, while high, can be justified because of the finca's heritage, assuming of course that its value and the value of the work performed were themselves justified. What cannot be justified is the fact that, since the acquisition, precious little has been done in making Son Real a genuine site to attract visitors. Self-financing via entrance fees, even over a period of several years, has simply not happened. The finca's visitor numbers are low, and its promotion, especially to tourists, is lamentable.
Much of the blame for the recent history can be attached to the decision to create the Fundació Balears Sostenible (sustainable Balearics foundation) in 2003. This foundation was designed to administer the eco-tax and, as a consequence, it ended up with overseeing different sites on Mallorca, of which Son Real was one. It was where the foundation was located that has come to be seen as having been the issue: within the tourism ministry.
It is arguable whether the tourism ministry was the correct one to have ultimate responsibility. But perhaps accepting that it wasn't the right one, the current government is to transfer management to the Espais de Natura Balear, which is an organisation within the environment ministry. Whether tourism or environment ministry just highlights the lack of focus in respect of the finca's management. Is it a tourist attraction or is it a place of environmental protection? The new management will hopefully improve the running of the finca, but whether it makes the slightest bit of difference to the number of visitors it attracts must be open to question.
More than just its place on the government's organisational chart, the foundation, created by the Jaume Matas administration, became embroiled in the corruption scandals at the tourism ministry that erupted three years ago. Unlike other agencies within the ministry that were also caught up in these scandals, it wasn't disbanded, but its future has been uncertain. And with this uncertainty has come a lack of direction and, more recently, a highly political direction that made the finca the focus of all manner of discontent.
The decision by the current government to appoint Jorge Campos as the director of the foundation and therefore the boss of the finca seemed somewhat strange. Though Campos had a background in environmental matters, he was far better known as having founded the right-wing, anti-Catalan Circulo Balear. Once in office, he made some provocative moves, such as insisting that the Spanish flag be flown at the entrance to the finca. Son Real became a political battleground between left and right, while Santa Margalida town hall got highly brassed off by what it saw as negligent administration.
Campos has now resigned his post. It was going to disappear anyway, along with the foundation, but his resignation owes nothing to issues related to the running of Son Real; it stems from his dissatisfaction with the Bauzá administration in not being more aggressive in pushing an anti-Catalan line. The question must be asked. Why was he ever appointed?
The environment ministry now assuming control, one would hope that a new and better era beckons for Son Real. It deserves far better. Whether it gets it, we'll find out.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Son Real, in terms of its volume of ancient remains, is the most important archaeological site on Mallorca. Period. Yet this most important of sites has been treated in a manner, since its acquisition by the Balearic Government in 2002, which amounts to a total and utter disgrace.
The finca was bought out of funds raised by the old eco-tax. Which is interesting in itself, as much of what should have been handed over from the tax wasn't and still hasn't been handed over because hotels which collected it have refused to. Let's give the government of the time (Francesc Antich's first PSOE-led coalition) the benefit of the doubt and accept that the eco-tax was the source of the funds. The finca cost 17.4 million euros.
It then cost a further three million euros for various works to be performed on the finca, including the old buildings that are there and the visitors' centre, a visitors' centre which has been closed for some months.
The cost, while high, can be justified because of the finca's heritage, assuming of course that its value and the value of the work performed were themselves justified. What cannot be justified is the fact that, since the acquisition, precious little has been done in making Son Real a genuine site to attract visitors. Self-financing via entrance fees, even over a period of several years, has simply not happened. The finca's visitor numbers are low, and its promotion, especially to tourists, is lamentable.
Much of the blame for the recent history can be attached to the decision to create the Fundació Balears Sostenible (sustainable Balearics foundation) in 2003. This foundation was designed to administer the eco-tax and, as a consequence, it ended up with overseeing different sites on Mallorca, of which Son Real was one. It was where the foundation was located that has come to be seen as having been the issue: within the tourism ministry.
It is arguable whether the tourism ministry was the correct one to have ultimate responsibility. But perhaps accepting that it wasn't the right one, the current government is to transfer management to the Espais de Natura Balear, which is an organisation within the environment ministry. Whether tourism or environment ministry just highlights the lack of focus in respect of the finca's management. Is it a tourist attraction or is it a place of environmental protection? The new management will hopefully improve the running of the finca, but whether it makes the slightest bit of difference to the number of visitors it attracts must be open to question.
More than just its place on the government's organisational chart, the foundation, created by the Jaume Matas administration, became embroiled in the corruption scandals at the tourism ministry that erupted three years ago. Unlike other agencies within the ministry that were also caught up in these scandals, it wasn't disbanded, but its future has been uncertain. And with this uncertainty has come a lack of direction and, more recently, a highly political direction that made the finca the focus of all manner of discontent.
The decision by the current government to appoint Jorge Campos as the director of the foundation and therefore the boss of the finca seemed somewhat strange. Though Campos had a background in environmental matters, he was far better known as having founded the right-wing, anti-Catalan Circulo Balear. Once in office, he made some provocative moves, such as insisting that the Spanish flag be flown at the entrance to the finca. Son Real became a political battleground between left and right, while Santa Margalida town hall got highly brassed off by what it saw as negligent administration.
Campos has now resigned his post. It was going to disappear anyway, along with the foundation, but his resignation owes nothing to issues related to the running of Son Real; it stems from his dissatisfaction with the Bauzá administration in not being more aggressive in pushing an anti-Catalan line. The question must be asked. Why was he ever appointed?
The environment ministry now assuming control, one would hope that a new and better era beckons for Son Real. It deserves far better. Whether it gets it, we'll find out.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
