Liberal Talk Radio

Any Iraq-success metrics should have the following characteristics. They must:

1. Be measurable
2. Produce actionable statistics
3. Link to definable goals
4. Be value-neutral

As a caveat, I’d also like to propose that the assumptions underlying the metrics should be clearly stated and agreed upon. “Success,” for example, is definable … “Democracy with universal suffrage and national parlimentary elections at least every 4 years” is very different than the broader “Democracy.” Any effort to develop specific metrics should first start with these assumptions.

Bruno’s been talking a lot lately about Rummy’s distinct squeamishness when it comes to announcing criteria for success.

As anyone who’s ever run an organization knows, without stakeholder-approved metrics, any business decisions quickly devolve into a nasty “he said, she said.” The strongest (man, usually) wins, and there’s ultimately no way to tell whether or not the right decision was made.

This is how we get cults of personality and charismatic religion … hmmm. Anyone sensing a pattern here? No metrics = cult of personality, and no metrics = Bush regime, so by extension cult of personality = Bush regime. (good god, but I love logic). It’s also the reason why the Great Society encouraged efforts to professionalize the public sector, to avoid the nepotistism-, racism-, classism-, and sexism-encouraging tendencies of policy without measurable outcomes.

Since our bumbling baron Bush is clearly befuddled, over the next few days, I’m going to make an effort to post some ideas on what such metrics might look like. Any links or thoughts you care to share are encouraged.