<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Let Suggestions bypass the Line Manager</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/2009/11/19/let-suggestions-bypass-the-line-manager/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/2009/11/19/let-suggestions-bypass-the-line-manager/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=let-suggestions-bypass-the-line-manager</link>
	<description>The BQF is the community for every business seeking excellent insights, tools and experiences to improve itself.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:36:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jabaldaia</title>
		<link>http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/2009/11/19/let-suggestions-bypass-the-line-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-391</link>
		<dc:creator>jabaldaia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/?p=533#comment-391</guid>
		<description>I think that who choose the bypass of the normal chain of command and when everyone knows the existence of such possibility have the guarantee of no bad brokerage upon their ideas.
By the other hand he or she may be shy and with a help from the chain they arrived to the top.
Nevertheless the first option is always better if we don`t want a killed idea or see our “child” with other parents.
I think that, In SME`s, we can find another problem if we work as a team. Recognition and responsibility will be not well distributed if we use the bypass.
I think it useful in that kind of organizations that some type of feedback would be allowed to the chain. 
Jose Baldaia</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that who choose the bypass of the normal chain of command and when everyone knows the existence of such possibility have the guarantee of no bad brokerage upon their ideas.<br />
By the other hand he or she may be shy and with a help from the chain they arrived to the top.<br />
Nevertheless the first option is always better if we don`t want a killed idea or see our “child” with other parents.<br />
I think that, In SME`s, we can find another problem if we work as a team. Recognition and responsibility will be not well distributed if we use the bypass.<br />
I think it useful in that kind of organizations that some type of feedback would be allowed to the chain.<br />
Jose Baldaia</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham Horton</title>
		<link>http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/2009/11/19/let-suggestions-bypass-the-line-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-390</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham Horton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:44:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bqf.org.uk/innovation/?p=533#comment-390</guid>
		<description>there is a stronger version of this recommendation which we sometimes suggest to our clients: &quot;let suggestions bypass anyone with a vested disinterest&quot;. 

i use the term &quot;vested disinterest&quot; to mean the opposite of a vested interest, i.e. having an interest in something not happening. that may be line managers, but is very often engineers who are afraid of being blamed for the failure of a high-risk development task.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>there is a stronger version of this recommendation which we sometimes suggest to our clients: &#8220;let suggestions bypass anyone with a vested disinterest&#8221;. </p>
<p>i use the term &#8220;vested disinterest&#8221; to mean the opposite of a vested interest, i.e. having an interest in something not happening. that may be line managers, but is very often engineers who are afraid of being blamed for the failure of a high-risk development task.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

