في بعض الشركات والمؤسسات التي يُفترض بها أن تقود التغيير وتجسِّد الكفاءة، يتكرر مشهد إداري عبثي: مسؤول جديد غير مُلم يعتلي المنصب، لا ليعزز الموجود، بل ليهدم ما بُني، ويعيد تشكيل المنظومة على مقاس دوائر معارف قديمة. يُقصي الكفاءات المتميزة، ويستقدم فريقًا جديدًا لا بناءً على احتياجات أو مؤهلات، بل بناءً على توصيات وعلاقات شخصية سابقة، تحت ذريعة «بناء فريق منسجم».
حينها، تبدأ في دفع الأثمان؛ يتراجع الأداء، ويُهدر الوقت والجهد والمال، وتتهاوى الروح المعنوية. والمفارقة أن استبعاد الأكفاء لا يكون لقصور في أدائهم، بل لأنهم خارج دوائر الولاءات الضيقة. يدرك بعض المستقطبين ضعف كفاءتهم، فيرون في زملائهم تهديدًا، فيشرعون في تشويه سمعتهم، وتلفيق الشكاوى ضدهم، بل وبناء تحالفات مع إدارة الموارد البشرية، التي يفترض أن تكون جهة ضامنة للعدالة المؤسسية تحمي الموظفين، لكنها تُستغل أحيانًا لتسخير صلاحياتها في تصفية الحسابات الشخصية.
وتحت شعارات التحول المؤسسي، وإعادة الهيكلة، والحوكمة، تبدأ عمليات الإقصاء الممنهج. وتُستخدم المصطلحات البرّاقة لتضليل المجالس العليا وخداع الواقع. بعضهم يُتقن ترديد خطاب الاحتراف، لكنه لا يفقه مضمونه، ويرتدي قناع المهنية الزائفة ليُقنع من لا يرى الميدان.
ويُضاف إلى ذلك تعيين مسؤولين في إدارات ذات طبيعة فنية معقدة بلا خلفية أو خبرة في مجالها، فتغيب الرؤية، وتُتخذ القرارات على أساس تصورات سطحية، وتتحول الاجتماعات إلى مساحات استعراض لا صناعة قرار.
الأخطر حين تتحول إدارات الموارد البشرية من ضامن للعدالة إلى أداة بيد المتنفذين، تبرر التجاوزات وتلوّح بعبارات مثل «الباب مفتوح»، في غياب ثقافة التمكين والتحفيز، وسيادة نهج الإقصاء والإخضاع.
تتكرر الدورة: يُجلب قائد، يفشل، يُستبدل، ولا مساءلة. بينما تدفع الشركة الثمن من ميزانيتها، وسمعتها، واستقرارها الداخلي، وثقة موظفيها وشركائها.
أيها القادة، التغيير الحقيقي لا يكون بتدوير المقاعد وتبديل الوجوه، بل بردّ الاعتبار للكفاءة، وتحقيق العدالة المؤسسية، ووقف هدر الطاقات والخبرات. المسؤولية لا تُمنح بالعلاقات، بل تُكتسب بالكفاءة.
وقد آن الأوان لمراجعة معايير التعيين، وتفكيك شبكات التوصيات، واستعادة الشركات من قبضة المصالح الضيقة.
قال تعالى: «إن خير من استأجرت القوي الأمين» (القصص: 26).
فخير القادة من يجمعون بين القوة والأمانة، وإن كنا لا نعمم بما جاء في المقال، فإن المؤسف أن مثل هذه الممارسات ما زالت حاضرة في القليل من المؤسسات، وهي بحاجة إلى تصحيح لا تأجيل.
تركي الذيب
العدالة المؤسسية بين التمكين والإقصاء
29 مايو 2025 - 00:15
|
آخر تحديث 29 مايو 2025 - 00:15
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
In some companies and institutions that are supposed to lead change and embody efficiency, a chaotic administrative scene repeats itself: an ill-informed new official ascends to the position, not to enhance what exists, but to demolish what has been built, reshaping the system to fit the circles of old acquaintances. They exclude outstanding talents and bring in a new team not based on needs or qualifications, but on recommendations and previous personal relationships, under the pretext of "building a cohesive team."
At that point, you begin to pay the price; performance declines, time, effort, and money are wasted, and morale collapses. The irony is that the exclusion of the competent is not due to shortcomings in their performance, but because they are outside the narrow circles of loyalty. Some of those who are recruited realize their lack of competence, seeing their colleagues as a threat, and they start to tarnish their reputations, fabricate complaints against them, and even build alliances with the human resources department, which is supposed to be a guarantor of institutional justice that protects employees, but is sometimes exploited to use its powers for personal vendettas.
Under the slogans of institutional transformation, restructuring, and governance, systematic exclusion processes begin. Glossy terms are used to mislead the upper councils and deceive reality. Some excel at repeating the rhetoric of professionalism, but do not understand its essence, wearing the mask of false professionalism to convince those who do not see the field.
Moreover, officials are appointed in departments with complex technical nature without any background or experience in the field, leading to a lack of vision, decisions being made based on superficial perceptions, and meetings turning into spaces for display rather than decision-making.
The most dangerous situation arises when human resources departments shift from being guarantors of justice to tools in the hands of the influential, justifying transgressions and waving phrases like "the door is open," in the absence of a culture of empowerment and motivation, and the dominance of exclusion and subjugation.
The cycle repeats: a leader is brought in, fails, is replaced, and there is no accountability. Meanwhile, the company pays the price in its budget, reputation, internal stability, and the trust of its employees and partners.
Leaders, real change does not come from rotating seats and changing faces, but by restoring the value of competence, achieving institutional justice, and stopping the waste of energies and expertise. Responsibility is not granted through relationships, but earned through competence.
It is time to review the criteria for appointments, dismantle networks of recommendations, and reclaim companies from the grip of narrow interests.
Allah Almighty said: "Indeed, the best of those you can hire is the strong and the trustworthy" (Qasas: 26).
The best leaders are those who combine strength and trustworthiness, and while we do not generalize what is stated in the article, it is unfortunate that such practices are still present in a few institutions, and they need correction, not postponement.
At that point, you begin to pay the price; performance declines, time, effort, and money are wasted, and morale collapses. The irony is that the exclusion of the competent is not due to shortcomings in their performance, but because they are outside the narrow circles of loyalty. Some of those who are recruited realize their lack of competence, seeing their colleagues as a threat, and they start to tarnish their reputations, fabricate complaints against them, and even build alliances with the human resources department, which is supposed to be a guarantor of institutional justice that protects employees, but is sometimes exploited to use its powers for personal vendettas.
Under the slogans of institutional transformation, restructuring, and governance, systematic exclusion processes begin. Glossy terms are used to mislead the upper councils and deceive reality. Some excel at repeating the rhetoric of professionalism, but do not understand its essence, wearing the mask of false professionalism to convince those who do not see the field.
Moreover, officials are appointed in departments with complex technical nature without any background or experience in the field, leading to a lack of vision, decisions being made based on superficial perceptions, and meetings turning into spaces for display rather than decision-making.
The most dangerous situation arises when human resources departments shift from being guarantors of justice to tools in the hands of the influential, justifying transgressions and waving phrases like "the door is open," in the absence of a culture of empowerment and motivation, and the dominance of exclusion and subjugation.
The cycle repeats: a leader is brought in, fails, is replaced, and there is no accountability. Meanwhile, the company pays the price in its budget, reputation, internal stability, and the trust of its employees and partners.
Leaders, real change does not come from rotating seats and changing faces, but by restoring the value of competence, achieving institutional justice, and stopping the waste of energies and expertise. Responsibility is not granted through relationships, but earned through competence.
It is time to review the criteria for appointments, dismantle networks of recommendations, and reclaim companies from the grip of narrow interests.
Allah Almighty said: "Indeed, the best of those you can hire is the strong and the trustworthy" (Qasas: 26).
The best leaders are those who combine strength and trustworthiness, and while we do not generalize what is stated in the article, it is unfortunate that such practices are still present in a few institutions, and they need correction, not postponement.


