When screening daily news, what’s noticeable. Which issues become headlines, who are the driving forces for new headlines, what’s the reaction of the public? For all that context, a professional analysis probably would detect interesting results. Especially group dynamics within the states organizations would be a rich field of exploration. Even ebepe is interested in methods and contexts on that stuff.

Here are the most popular reasons for new headlines. Either anything happens or anything gets introduced by a politician. Maybe even uncovering journalism opens hidden stuff to daylight. In any case the issue of interest is recognized by the public as sexy and exciting matter. Things having this position outside the usual philosophy will be discussed now. Means, only issues with unusual attributes will produce impressive headlines. The worldwide journalism industry gets it’s fertile soil out of that stuff. As result, journalists try for exaggerated and shimmering colored reports. Even in so called “cucumber” periods they try to blow up daily life matters to exciting articles. Dealing with that stuff of course seems to be really sexy…

After the introduction now an example: First of all, media will bring an issue to the public via headline. If it’s a political issue, the responsible minister at once will be pushed to a tight spot. In interviews he needs to give explanations and answers immediately, otherwise he would earn an image of incompetence. But at once also means, without prior opportunity to analyze and coordinate well. Two classical cases are possible:

First case: The issue affects coalition matters. Then representatives of both parties are forced to give separate interviews. Because of the missing opportunity to coordinate well in advance, they probably will give slightly or even very different answers. And exactly that’s the stuff of journalists fertile soil. Starting with coalition crash up to new elections the scope of headlines may reach. And now a fascinating group dynamics starts. Especially representatives with unsolved political career targets now will start personal activity to create their image.

Second case: The issue was positioned by an opposition side representative. Supposing an intelligent issue selection, he has the powerful “surprise effect” on his side. During taking the first deep breath, the attacked needs to give satisfying answers at once and the opportunity for ill-considered declarations is rather high. At the same time the attacker may improve his public image by presentation of well prepared concepts. Intelligent dealing with that principles is sometimes called populism…

Stepping one step back, interesting matters get visible:

Media plays an important and comprehensive role. Journalists are able to build up not reality complying artificial priorities on issues. Only good knowledge of ones concepts and priorities and coordinated comments are helpful to avoid “misunderstandings”.

For organizations with an active self understanding and attitude, dealing with such matters seems to be easy. The precondition to select interesting issues for discussion shapes a fine public image.

Organizations with a reactive self understanding and attitude often have troubles to deal with the mentioned matters. They feel irritated in their self oriented occupation. Often they have no idea how to react intelligent. They also rather tend to attack the bearer than the issue. They have best competence to “let problems vanish under the carpet”

Analyzing issues creating helplessness one may summarize, often there are really no concepts visible solving the open questions. Every new question opens new problems and solving of problems looks like patchwork. This bottom up approach has the dramatic disadvantage, not to know the final goal. Only a top down approach shaped in advance can clarify the strategy and fix the goals, bottom up then brings the tactics.

The distinct immovability of organizations gets recognizable. Everybody immediately knows why a new idea will not work, but nobody is willing to analyze backgrounds in order to achieve new insights. Such behavior is expression of a well-feed self understanding and sleepy laziness in thinking. Only new and heavy suffering may wake up the organization.

Methods in order to get feedback about activity performance are strictly hidden. Some say, they are missing still. Therefore nobody exactly knows the actual status. Some cheeky guys assume that’s because they even haven’t the corresponding goals and strategies…

Facing all that, one should not be surprised, that budgeting is really a tough job. Because of the amorphous shape optimizations are really difficult or even impossible. As far as no general strategy and commonly fixed goals are agreed, budgeting health hazard will be prolonged. But thanks god, states like Austria have their good taxpayers…

Remark: though the article focus’ on the Austrian situation, a lot may be of general validity.

What’s the trick behind? R1-20000709