|
While I admit it is a strange hire I think most here are being a little...make that a great deal...arrogant. Anyone hired to run a segment of any business at that level within the organization does not necessarily have to know everything there is to know about the "on the floor" details. Executives at that level need to be very good at (1) managing the people that report to them (2) evaluating and hiring their immediate subordinates (3) setting the agenda for the "division" (4) setting the management tone (5) receiving recommendations from thier subordinates and making decisions.
Why is it necessary for someone that he be an official to manage the people reporting directly to him? People are people...assigning them task, setting deadlines and holding them accountable are not skills held exclusively by officials.
What makes anyone think he needs to be one of the top officials in the NBA to select someone to manage particular areas under his jurisdiction? He has an entire officiating staff and others who have called in the league to use as a resource in getting the right person to develop training programs, evaluation systems, etc. He can hire a subordinate to oversee that task.
Why is it necessary that he previously called NBA games to know that official ethics might be an area that needs review and modification. Even if the officials are "the best in the world", does that mean they cannot get better and that there is no need to review, refine and expand the training program? Do the need to implement/refine their efforts to recruit and groom the next generation of top officials? When your 20 best decide to retire, the next 20 on your rating list better be ready to step up. Again, something he can hire someone to handle.
It is not necessary for someone to be an official to set policy related to discipline, promotion, etc. Knowing you have someone who will can your arse if your performance on the floor declines substantially or you do too many stupid things off the floor is not a bad thing. I don't know every single detail about every aspect to the jobs performed be people in my department. However, if my manager comes to me and says they have warned an employee twice, counseled them on improving their performance and given them additional training but things aren't improving I can still make to decision to send them down the road. If someone commits a blatant violation of policy I am still able to hand down the appropriate punishment.
Please...maybe someone should find out exactly what the NBA Commissioner and owners want that position to accomplish before we decide if his qualifications are a match. Just because some things in the job description are obvious does not mean the obvious things are an all inclusive list. There may be other things on the list that are deemed more important in the short to middle term.
|