also, John Gall's Systemantics - First Principles - : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemantics

'Once a system is set up to solve some problem, the system itself is new entity which engenders new problems relating the development, operations, and maintenance of that system'

This is why these hit pieces are completely unfair to the TSA. Just about every organization becomes self-preserving as its primary function. Government and non-profit are the most obvious but the bureaucracy of for-profit companies and even individual divisions inside of those companies follow the same rules.

I was just looking over the recent Android handsets via tmobile and was shocked at the nightmare of tacked-on apps and other carrier garbage on them. All these divisions in t-mobile are trying to justify their existence by dropping various apps on the handsets like music managers, music stores, t-mobile tv, AV, security, etc etc. No one wants or needs these and the few that do will find them in the play store.

Look at well run companies like Apple or Google. The iphone and the Nexus have none of this junk. I imagine their corporate culture is a lot less bureaucratic than that of a carrier like tmobile.

>in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself.

I like to think Apple and Google are the former and carriers in the latter.

> Just about every organization becomes self-preserving as its primary function.

But when they prioritize self-preservation over their intended goal, that's bad.

I think the real issue arises in organizations where self-preservation is actually at odds with, or at least orthogonal to, the organization's stated goal. Take the TSA, for instance (and many government agencies, departments within large corporations, nonprofits, etc.).

The supposed goal of the TSA is to efficiently and effectively protect travelers and the country from criminal and terrorist actions. In theory, if the TSA is doing its job well, it's actually reducing budgetary needs and slashing fat in favor of efficiency. The TSA should be trying to become clever and nimble, moreso than massive and overhead-burdened.

But the self-preservation mandate suggests the opposite. Self-preservation, for a government agency, means making sure you preserve or grow your budget year over year -- because you're fighting other agencies for it. Every dollar you get is up for grabs by other agencies next fiscal, and vice versa. Accordingly, becoming expensive and inefficient works in favor of self-preservation. As any seasoned bureaucrat knows, not achieving results means asking for more money to throw at the problem. If the TSA demonstrated that it was achieving its goals at current budget levels, it wouldn't receive the same budget next year. Or even face a budgetary reduction.

I think most people are resigned to the existence of bureaucracies, despite such problems as rent-seeking, inefficiency, etc, as long as they meet a few basic criteria:

(1) they serve some reasonably obvious positive purpose

(2) the negative effects of what they do aren't too noxious, in particular when compared with (1)

The TSA, it would seem basically fails on both points. Despite the good intentions with which it was formed, it's pretty clear that they don't improve safety in any significant manner (you might find people some disagree about this, because they believe the security theater, but I think the number is dropping). The negative effects of their existence, of course, are legion, (I suspect it's quite hard to find anybody that disagrees on this point!).

So I'd suggest the public probably on average doesn't support the TSA to the same degree they might other bureaucracies, even those that they find annoying.

Unfortunately, of course, the public's opinion on the matter is of little importance once the system is in place...

I like most of what you say. However the first sentence about being unfair to the TSA seems out of place. You're right about self preserving organizing but that doesn't mean we're being unfair. TSA is a horrible organization that needs to be dismantled.

Oh I dislike them, but lets have a holistic view of this stuff. Just picking out the TSA is unfair. They're no different than most bureaucracies.

They are absolutely different from most bureaucracies.

Name another bureaucracy that slid its hand up my leg until it encountered The Resistance, or a bureaucracy that prevents me from bringing my favorite deodorant when I travel, or one that can arbitrarily say that I am not allowed to fly across the country.

Most other bureaucracies weren't created out of a misguided attempt to solve a problem that didn't actually exist and aren't an undue financial burden on an already financially strained system.

I realize almost all bureaucracies waste money to some extent, but the TSA is a waste to the tune of $8bn USD per year with no measurable benefits and no evidence that it was ever needed.

Imagine if that money were redirected into social programs, NASA, and educational programs! We could have a major, tangible positive effect in spite of bureaucracy, instead of pissing $8bn into an organization that behaves like an organized crime syndicate.

Predictability is no excuse for malfeasance.