الشللية في إدارة المشاريع والشركات ليست مجرد صداقات شخصية أو دوائر نفوذ ضيقة، بل كثيراً ما تتحول إلى اصطفافات مناطقية مكشوفة! نرى شركات كبرى اليوم غلب عليها أهل منطقة معينة مثلاً، ووزارات يكاد يتشكّل نسيجها من منطقة أخرى، وهيئات ومؤسسات تتحول مع الوقت إلى «حكر» جغرافي!
فهل قُسمنا إدارياً وفق الشلة وخرائط الانتماء؟
في بعض الشركات، تكاد لا تجد موظفاً قيادياً إلا وهو من الجنوب مثلاً، وكأنها شركة عائلية وليست مؤسسة وطنية.. وفي وزارات أخرى، تلمح بوضوح أن الكفة تميل إلى أهل الحجاز مثلاً، بينما وزارات بعينها يغلب عليها أبناء المنطقة الوسطى. هذا التمركّز ليس مجرد مصادفة، بل نتيجة ذهنية شللية متجذّرة، ترى في الولاء معياراً أهم من الكفاءة.
الخطر هنا أن هذه البُنى المغلقة لا تسمح بتجديد الدماء ولا بفتح المجال أمام الطاقات من مختلف المناطق، التنوع الذي هو ثروة وطنية يُقصى لحساب المحاباة، والنتيجة أن المؤسسات تتحول إلى نُسخ مكررة من نفسها، مغلقة على عقلية واحدة، لغة واحدة، ونمط تفكير واحد!
تبريرات هذا النمط جاهزة دائماً: «هؤلاء أبناء ثقة»، «نحتاج فريقاً متجانساً»، «التجربة علّمتنا أن نستعين بالمضمونين»... «ما في وقت نعلّم»!!
لكن في الحقيقة، ما يحدث هو إعادة إنتاجٍ للشللية؛ تُقصي الكفاءات الأخرى وتحرم المؤسسات من تنوع ضروري لأي ابتكار أو تطوير.
الأخطر أن هذا النمط لا يقتصر على التوظيف، بل يمتد إلى القرار نفسه! حين يجلس المديرون من نفس الدائرة المناطقية أو الشلة، يهيمنون على المشاريع كأنها حصص، ويتقاسمون النفوذ وكأنهم أصحاب ملكية خاصة.
غياب التنوع يخلق جموداً، وغياب المنافسة يقتل الإبداع، ومع الوقت تتحول هذه الجهات إلى هياكل عاجزة، تكرر نفسها وتعيد إنتاج فشلها أحياناً... مع نفس الشلة بإنجازات كبيرة.. وعلى الجهة الأخرى ملايين مهدورة ولكنها (مكمكمه)... لا تنمية بالعالم يمكن أن تقوم على شلل ومحاصصة، ولا وطن يمكن أن ينهض إذا كان أبناؤه يُفرَزون إلى دوائر مغلقة كل واحدة منها تتصرف كأنها صاحبة الحق الحصري.
الشللية، سواء جاءت في صورة صداقات شخصية أو اصطفافات مناطقية، هي عدو صريح للتنمية.. فالتنمية الحقيقية لا تُبنى على «هذا ولدنا» ولا على «هذولا جماعتنا»...
وفاء الرشيد
«هذا ولدنا».. الوصفة السريّة لتعطيل التنمية..!
28 سبتمبر 2025 - 00:03
|
آخر تحديث 28 سبتمبر 2025 - 00:03
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
The cliquishness in project management and companies is not just about personal friendships or narrow circles of influence; it often turns into blatant regional alignments! We see major companies today dominated by people from a specific area, for example, and ministries that seem to be woven together from another region, with agencies and institutions gradually becoming a geographical "monopoly"!
Have we been administratively divided according to cliques and maps of affiliation?
In some companies, you can hardly find a leadership employee who is not from the south, for instance, as if it were a family business rather than a national institution. In other ministries, you can clearly see that the balance tilts towards the people of Hijaz, while certain ministries are predominantly filled with individuals from the central region. This concentration is not just a coincidence; it is the result of a deeply rooted cliquish mentality that sees loyalty as a criterion more important than competence.
The danger here is that these closed structures do not allow for the renewal of talent or the opening up of opportunities for energies from different regions. The diversity, which is a national treasure, is sidelined in favor of favoritism, resulting in institutions turning into repeated copies of themselves, closed off to a single mentality, a single language, and a single way of thinking!
Justifications for this pattern are always ready: "These are trusted individuals," "We need a homogeneous team," "Experience has taught us to rely on the loyal ones"... "There’s no time to train!"
But in reality, what happens is a reproduction of cliquishness; it excludes other competencies and deprives institutions of the necessary diversity for any innovation or development.
The more dangerous aspect is that this pattern is not limited to employment; it extends to decision-making itself! When managers from the same regional circle or clique sit together, they dominate projects as if they were shares, dividing influence as if they were private owners.
The absence of diversity creates stagnation, and the lack of competition kills creativity. Over time, these entities turn into incapable structures, repeating themselves and sometimes reproducing their failures... with the same clique achieving great accomplishments... while on the other side, millions are wasted but remain "tied up"... No development in the world can thrive on cliques and quotas, and no nation can rise if its children are sorted into closed circles, each acting as if it has exclusive rights.
Cliquishness, whether it appears in the form of personal friendships or regional alignments, is a clear enemy of development. True development is not built on "this is our boy" or "these are our people"...
Have we been administratively divided according to cliques and maps of affiliation?
In some companies, you can hardly find a leadership employee who is not from the south, for instance, as if it were a family business rather than a national institution. In other ministries, you can clearly see that the balance tilts towards the people of Hijaz, while certain ministries are predominantly filled with individuals from the central region. This concentration is not just a coincidence; it is the result of a deeply rooted cliquish mentality that sees loyalty as a criterion more important than competence.
The danger here is that these closed structures do not allow for the renewal of talent or the opening up of opportunities for energies from different regions. The diversity, which is a national treasure, is sidelined in favor of favoritism, resulting in institutions turning into repeated copies of themselves, closed off to a single mentality, a single language, and a single way of thinking!
Justifications for this pattern are always ready: "These are trusted individuals," "We need a homogeneous team," "Experience has taught us to rely on the loyal ones"... "There’s no time to train!"
But in reality, what happens is a reproduction of cliquishness; it excludes other competencies and deprives institutions of the necessary diversity for any innovation or development.
The more dangerous aspect is that this pattern is not limited to employment; it extends to decision-making itself! When managers from the same regional circle or clique sit together, they dominate projects as if they were shares, dividing influence as if they were private owners.
The absence of diversity creates stagnation, and the lack of competition kills creativity. Over time, these entities turn into incapable structures, repeating themselves and sometimes reproducing their failures... with the same clique achieving great accomplishments... while on the other side, millions are wasted but remain "tied up"... No development in the world can thrive on cliques and quotas, and no nation can rise if its children are sorted into closed circles, each acting as if it has exclusive rights.
Cliquishness, whether it appears in the form of personal friendships or regional alignments, is a clear enemy of development. True development is not built on "this is our boy" or "these are our people"...


