Escalation: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Escalation (view source)

Revision as of 21:25, 15 January 2021

672 bytes added , 15 January 2021

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-When a young [[negotiator]] engaged in a contractual workflow encounters a challenge beyond her mandate to approve she escalates. She may escalate upwards, to her own line manager, if it is a legal call beyond her pay-grade, or horizontally, to another risk controller, of the risk in question is not legal, but one of credit, market or trading risk.
+{{a|negotiation|}}When a young [[negotiator]] engaged in a contractual workflow encounters a challenge beyond her mandate to approve she [[Escalation|escalates]]. She may escalate ''[[vertical escalation|upwards]]'', to her own [[line manager]], if it is a call within her domain but beyond her pay-grade, or ''[[horizontal escalation|horizontally]]'', to another [[risk controller]], if the risk item is beyond her own department’s mandate, but one of credit, market or trading risk.
-[[Escalation]], of either kind, is this a key, and underestimated, feature of the [[negotiation]] process, rife with oubliettes, resentment and missed emails.
+[[Escalation]], of either kind, is a key, and underestimated, “feature” of the [[negotiation]] process. It is rife with resentment and [[ennui]] and studded with bottomless oubliettes down which your query can fall, or be stuffed, it always being a safer tactic for an escalat''ee'' to [[ignore]], rather than act on, a request for a decision, if there is any prospect that question might just go away. In the modern organisation, many do.
-Redolent of, and apt to generate emotions similar to those one experiences when one is, being driven up the wall.
-Usually as a result of some wild goose chase convened by [[sales]] to chase [[revenue projection|illusory revenues]], and the fact that they've come to you means they've failed to persuade a more cautious soul and they think you’re a soft touch.
+As for the escalat''or'', the best-case scenario is that an [[escalation]] will only take {{wasteprov|time}}; languishing in an inbox, or buried deep in a to-do list. It will comprise the un-knitted air of an un-returned phone call or an ignored chat. This process will last for days or weeks. Then, when the awaited answer arrives, it is never quite the one the enquirer seeks. {{sex|She}} may seek further input from another colleague. She may initiating the launch sequence for an [[escalation circle]]. She may partially answer the question, or ambiguously, or in terms so vague that the escalator isn't quite sure what to do next. Her answer may be so obviously couched in the language of slidery that the escalator is sore afraid to take it at face value: “[[At this stage]] I would be [[inclined]] [[I don't disagree with you|not to disagree]] with this view”
-Working theory: the '''fact''' of an escalation—the very interposition of an approval step in, itself, in which one piece of the [[meatware]] shunts a problem to another piece of the [[meatware]]—causes more in aggregate delay, confusion, aggravation and second-order bureaucracy than is ''ever'' solved by the resolution it delivers.
+This all leads to ...
+{{fourth law of worker entropy}}
 {{draft}}
-{{Seealso}}
+{{sa}}
+*The [[laws of worker entropy]]
 *[[Compliance arbitrage]]
 *[[Circle of escalation]]