Direct or Indirect that is the question.
intelligent and part of senior management you likely already have a
strong opinion however as a result of this comment perhaps a future
pause or reflection could shape a future decision that otherwise would
The laboratory like the tide has shifted strategy over and
over regarding the flow of costs toward or away from indirect (G&A
and Site Support).
Currently it appears to those in the trenches
the strategy is to move costs into indirect with the intention of better
managing those resources.
I would like to bring to your attention an alternate thought from a time when the strategy tide was completely reversed.
programs charge resources (labor and non-labor) directly the cost
saving self-interest/motivation is high. For every dollar saved that
specific program saves a dollar.
When programs charge resources
(labor and non-labor) to indirect self-interest is the reverse. Spend
every dollar since saving a dollar would only result in perhaps specific
program savings of twenty five cents at best (if the stars, moon and
sun align with a rate decrease after the miracle of no one else at the
lab offsetting that savings).
Good intentions to manage better in
my humble opinion are not as effective as making it in the
self-interest of each PAD to realize cost savings.
understand that efficiencies can be realized with the synergy of
combining like functions. Those opportunities should be a very clear and
a large slam dunk to offset the hard results that naturally come from
building self-interest in to the decision making process.
Thank you for your time,
Respectfully. A current and hopeful long term employee who loves working at the lab.
This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog authors serve as moderators. For new topics or suggestions, email email@example.com
- ► 2017 (258)
- ► 2016 (295)
- ► 2015 (330)
- ► 2014 (309)
- Safety in natural disasters
- Taking another shot at cutting nukes
- FY14 NNSA Budget: Scarce Resources Devoted to Nucl...
- To Senior Management:
- LLNL Director's update
- Reimagining the National Laboratories
- NNSA Outlines Price Tag Of '3+2' Vision For Future...
- Unemployement benefits for SSVPers
- Cuts to nuclear weapons:
- Mixed Outlook for DOE
- Former Top DOE Intelligence Official to Serve as ‘...
- Lab Employees Opt for Early Retirement
- Davis-Bacon Act problem
- Which Davis?
- Lots of explaining
- NNSA Head computer account hacked!
- Pentagon Could Be Best Place For NNSA Autonomy
- LANL subject to another IG report
- Saving the ozone layer
- Status on furloughs?
- Layoffs Then and Now
- What a waste!
- Lab directors at ORNL
- On another subject: grade retention
- National Ignition Facility faces an uncertain futu...
- Another look at overblown NNSA budgets
- Who is next?
- ▼ June (28)
- ► 2012 (258)
- ► 2011 (162)
- ► 2010 (157)
- ► 2009 (231)
- ► 2008 (374)