Which type of permit office would you rather work with/for?

[Eric]

Which type of permit office would you rather work with/for?

• One that's more professional and bureaucratic, with more top-down decision-making, but slower
• One that's less professional and bureaucratic, with more delegated decision-making, but faster

I thought this question represents a good contrast between two types of permit offices that I've experienced during my career. Some are highly buttoned-up and don't issue decisions/correspondence without extensive internal review/sign-off. Others lean more toward letting staff run the show, with more matters being resolved informally via email. With the latter, you often get sloppier/non-peer reviewed responses, but the process seems to move a lot faster.

 

[Emily C]

I'd rather work with (and for) one that takes longer but is more efficient. One that is less professional and less consistent means more re-work from staff and likely more money from the applicant. The one that is slower likely spends a lot of time in their code ensuring that they are following the letter of the law...sure, as a customer it sucks having to wait, but I'd feel better knowing that the time was taken.

 

[Eric]

I like this question because I'd say earlier in my career I tended to side with "process-oriented/slow" but as I've become more seasoned I've definitely taken a more action-oriented mentality. Assuming we're talking about experienced staff and equally legal defensible permit decisions, these days I'm a proponent of delegating to staff and avoiding bureaucratic excess (e.g., multiple levels of review) as much as possible. I don't think the public generally cares whether our work products are highly professional or sound like they're written at an eighth-grade level, as long as the permitting is completed efficiently and meets minimum standards of legal adequacy.

One that is less professional and less consistent means more re-work from staff and likely more money from the applicant.

Certainly, less consistency/oversight could translate into cutting corners and more legal risk for the applicant and the government. But assuming there's high confidence that this wouldn't be an issue, I'd say delegate and trust (but verify) your staff's work.

 

[shwhite]

Personally, I would rather work for one that's more professional but slower because I currently work in the opposite work setting and there is no straight forward answers, work is pushed off on others, people tend to work at their own pace when they feel like working, etc. I prefer a more structured work setting where everyone is involved and doing their part.

 

[Eric]

Personally, I would rather work for one that's more professional but slower because I currently work in the opposite work setting and there is no straight forward answers, work is pushed off on others, people tend to work at their own pace when they feel like working, etc. I prefer a more structured work setting where everyone is involved and doing their part.

I definitely hear you on this. Still, despite the hazards, I'd rather that work - and especially decision-making - be delegated as much as possible. I think morale among permitting staff is going to be higher when people feel empowered to take action and have real-world impact without getting too tied up in bureaucracy. In any scenario, you have to have good leadership.