Talk:John Seddon

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Criticism section[edit]

Hello. I am concerned that John Seddon is a controversial figure about whom there has been significant criticism, and this page is entirely uncritical. The content, which I believe is accurate and which I am not criticising, has been entirely created by one person who works in a public relations capacity for John Seddon - Charlotte Pell, http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/charlotte-pell/13/8b3/102/ - and one Alice Moffatt, whose only contributions appear to have been the creation of this page.

Some of the more critical material on John Seddon found through a web search includes: http://www.leanblog.org/2010/10/the-one-where-john-seddon-lies-or-has-his-facts-very-very-wrong/ http://thinkpurpose.com/2012/09/16/john-seddon-is-not-systems-thinking-2/ http://seddonwatch.blogspot.co.uk/ (this one is pretty scurilous - and anonymous - so I don't think makes an appropriate wikipedia source) There have also been significant discussions in the local government press (Municipal Journal, Local Government Chronicle, and Public Finance), in articles, letters, and comments - some of which are behind paywalls but which are probably linkable.

If I find time, I will try to constructively edit the page, this note I suppose is a marker to others to say that there is an opportunity to balance this article more accurately.

Disclosure - I am Ben Taylor, author of the article I have posted as a link (NB this is a scholarly article and also behind a paywall - does this disqualify it?), and both a competitor and, to a large degree, a fan of John Seddon (and his company, Vanguard Consulting) - my details at http://www.linkedin.com/in/antlerboy Wushinbo (talk) 10:41, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update[edit]

Update/corrections to my comment above: 1) some of the Local Government Chronicle content is linked (but is paywalled) 2) a lot of the links are outdated (all the academic profile pages from universities seem to be dead, but I don't have time to remove) 3) it's been said to me that someone with a direct interest as the main creator of the page seems to have should not create a biography under wikipedia rules, so I will flag this on the biography discussion page Wushinbo (talk) 12:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Pell[edit]

Charlotte Pell should NOT be editing this page, as she is directly associated with John Seddon:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/charlotte-pell/13/8b3/102 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgraban (talk • contribs) 16:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Debate section references[edit]

Two of the references for this section are behind a pay wall. The article states that Mr Walker said-

Mr Seddon is incontinent in his judgement. To say ‘economy of scale is a myth’ betrays what can best be called a religious rather than an empirical mind set."

I would guess he said inconsistent rather than incontinent ? Can't check due to fore mentioned pay wall. Jonpatterns (talk) 13:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He definitely says "incontinent". Link to article on lgcplus.com He also says

Audit Commission reporting under the Comprehensive Performance Assessment was nothing to do with ‘targets’ anyway. These were disinterested appraisals of corporate performance produced not for our benefit but for local citizens and councillors and the officers they appointed to use.

- which I thought was rather lovely :) . A "disinterested appraisal of corporate performance" sounds so much better than a "target"! MatthewMorris (talk) 12:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]