A few days ago, a news item appeared on the internet pages of the most prominent Slovak newspaper. Only on internet. It was an open letter from the previous General Manager of the Slovak National Opera Marián Chudovský, addressed to the present General Manager Ms Hroncová to step down for proven mismanagement, simultaneously appealing to the Minister of Culture to take adequate steps. The smashing facts - so obvious, that even a blind person could see them in the past few months - were fully justifiably summed up, and still in a courteous manner. The fierce discussion, which it unleashed afterwards - less courteous in some cases - revealed even further serious matters that lingered under the surface. It was a deed, which normally speaking demanded a reaction. Any rection would do.
I waited for a few days, till another article appeared... In my wildest dreams I couldn't have imagine this to be true. What was missing? Any official respons of any possible kind to the facts presented. Here we are slowly treading into a dramatically damaging situation. Ms Hroncová has managed the National Theatre (under which the National Opera falls) for 4 seasons. She holds an almost unique record of having used 5 managers in the Opera (which she appointed herself, then disposed off). What good does it serve? Especially the last 2 Opera Managers were the least successful - a conductor (Oliver Dohnányi) not paying any attention to his function of being a manager at all, then the renowned opera diva Ms Beňačková, who at the beginning perhaps did try to play the role of a manager, however, had no managerial skills at all and after only four months left, shrowded in deep mysterious silence. During her office, the Opera had the most performance-changes, replacements and/or cancellations in history (and not all because of indispositions of soloists...) The Guiness Book of Records can add another chapter.
Where people work, some disaccords or mistakes do take place. When we work with transparency, we have some extra credit to mend our wrong decisions. The Opera seems to live in a phantasy world, where management is convinced that deceit and lying will remain within its walls as long as you keep your mouth shut.
The discussion after the aforementioned article proved exactly how well informed people are, and thanks to internet, insiders have a way - even as anonymous discussion partners - to reveal inside information without limits. Ms Hroncová and the Ministry of Culture should be much at guard; exactly their silence, trying to ignore signals, will prove deadly. If Ms Hroncová - by way of her spokesperson - refuses to react because Mr Chudovský's accusations are "emotional", this exactly arouses the suspicion. Why is it so problematic to admit flaws and explain what your strategic planning is? One doesn't refute news or rumours by refusal to communicate. In short: Ms Hroncová is not able to prove Mr Chudovský's points being emotional (thus implying they are false) because they are correct and valid points.
Likewise, when Ms Beňačková left, not even a press-release was issued, the spokesperson was too busy "because of a première". What foul business must be hidden behind doors of Ms Hroncová's office? As the State Opera (c.q. National Theatre) is a public entity, government (tax-payers' money) goes there. But neither the Ministry has an interest in clarifying the matter. But in a country, where the Ministry pays the Slovak Philharmonic a budget, plus stashes additional sums (quasi for extra projects) into the pockets of its Director, meanwhile refusing to support other ensembles, which have even more to offer, it obvious how the political maffia systematically misappropriates funds. In other EU countries this is a punishable offense. In plain language; it's criminal behaviour. In Slovakia it's a sad reality. If we imagine how public broadly reacted on Emile Zola's newspaper article J'accuse, Slovak leaders are marked by an all present stiffening authism when fishy business is being addressed.
My recommendation; why doesn't the Ministry and its comrades-in-arms apply to go on a course "Basics in PR within Public Administration" (If it's too much of a luxury; you could request even EU-Funding for it!). There is still much to learn. Good governance is a rare asset these days.
I waited for a few days, till another article appeared... In my wildest dreams I couldn't have imagine this to be true. What was missing? Any official respons of any possible kind to the facts presented. Here we are slowly treading into a dramatically damaging situation. Ms Hroncová has managed the National Theatre (under which the National Opera falls) for 4 seasons. She holds an almost unique record of having used 5 managers in the Opera (which she appointed herself, then disposed off). What good does it serve? Especially the last 2 Opera Managers were the least successful - a conductor (Oliver Dohnányi) not paying any attention to his function of being a manager at all, then the renowned opera diva Ms Beňačková, who at the beginning perhaps did try to play the role of a manager, however, had no managerial skills at all and after only four months left, shrowded in deep mysterious silence. During her office, the Opera had the most performance-changes, replacements and/or cancellations in history (and not all because of indispositions of soloists...) The Guiness Book of Records can add another chapter.
Where people work, some disaccords or mistakes do take place. When we work with transparency, we have some extra credit to mend our wrong decisions. The Opera seems to live in a phantasy world, where management is convinced that deceit and lying will remain within its walls as long as you keep your mouth shut.
The discussion after the aforementioned article proved exactly how well informed people are, and thanks to internet, insiders have a way - even as anonymous discussion partners - to reveal inside information without limits. Ms Hroncová and the Ministry of Culture should be much at guard; exactly their silence, trying to ignore signals, will prove deadly. If Ms Hroncová - by way of her spokesperson - refuses to react because Mr Chudovský's accusations are "emotional", this exactly arouses the suspicion. Why is it so problematic to admit flaws and explain what your strategic planning is? One doesn't refute news or rumours by refusal to communicate. In short: Ms Hroncová is not able to prove Mr Chudovský's points being emotional (thus implying they are false) because they are correct and valid points.
Likewise, when Ms Beňačková left, not even a press-release was issued, the spokesperson was too busy "because of a première". What foul business must be hidden behind doors of Ms Hroncová's office? As the State Opera (c.q. National Theatre) is a public entity, government (tax-payers' money) goes there. But neither the Ministry has an interest in clarifying the matter. But in a country, where the Ministry pays the Slovak Philharmonic a budget, plus stashes additional sums (quasi for extra projects) into the pockets of its Director, meanwhile refusing to support other ensembles, which have even more to offer, it obvious how the political maffia systematically misappropriates funds. In other EU countries this is a punishable offense. In plain language; it's criminal behaviour. In Slovakia it's a sad reality. If we imagine how public broadly reacted on Emile Zola's newspaper article J'accuse, Slovak leaders are marked by an all present stiffening authism when fishy business is being addressed.
My recommendation; why doesn't the Ministry and its comrades-in-arms apply to go on a course "Basics in PR within Public Administration" (If it's too much of a luxury; you could request even EU-Funding for it!). There is still much to learn. Good governance is a rare asset these days.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar