To think people idealise the private sector as more efficient, when it’s just as subject to egos and mismanagement as the public sector?

[MyAmusedOpalCrab]

I often see the private sector being held up as the gold standard for efficiency, cost-effectiveness and good management, while the public sector is dismissed as bloated, bureaucratic and wasteful. But in my experience, the private sector can be just as bad, if not worse, when it comes to incompetence, office politics and poor leadership.

I’ve worked in both sectors and I’ve seen shocking mismanagement, inflated salaries for ineffective leadership and decision-making driven more by personal agendas than actual efficiency. At least in the public sector there’s usually some level of transparency and accountability, whereas in private companies, things can be just as dysfunctional but hidden behind a polished image.

AIBU to think that people overestimate how well the private sector functions or is my experience just unlucky?

I've worked with both and I agree both can be shockingly bad. The public sector tends to have a special level of nonsense though, usually because they're answerable to a minister or some aspect of government which makes them particularly bureaucratic and slow moving.

I've seen spectacular levels on incompetence and croneyism in the private sector. In the public sector, where I work freelance on a regular basis, I am staggered by the number of middle managers who appear to do nothing all day while a handful of others work 100 hour weeks. In my sector two managers do all the work, and are spectacular at their jobs, and the rest (there are too many) just loaf around and occasionally meddle to make a mark. It put me off applying for permanent work as I know I'd get sucked into being one of the 100-hour-a-week crew simply because I'd want things to actually happen.

As someone in the US, I find private sector much worse and a big part of that, at least here, is the lack of accountability. It's all about the money.

I think the difference is that many privately held companies don't have unions, and employment contracts have 1 month notice periods, rather than 6 month or more

It's much easier to get rid of those who aren't performing in a small company than it is in a setting like the NHS, as a result.

It's when contracts include long notice periods and complex disciplinary processes that it can take longer. That means management in all sectors.

I’ve also worked in both and I agree with you - there is no secret sauce in a private sector company that’s missing in the public sector. People just think - private money = efficiency. In reality, from what I’ve seen, they are remarkably similar in the way they work.

There's plenty of inefficiency in the private sector, but fundamentally if a business is too inefficient they go bust.

Public sector can continue beyond that point for far longer, because the money coming in is much more indirectly tied to the value they provide.

That’s interesting. I’m in the US too and I find the private sector here to be far more efficient than in the UK - shit gets done, not just talked about. I’m working in the same industry too, so it’s a fair comparison. It’s also a hell of a lot easier to fire someone in the US, and regular “RIFs” (reductions in force) are the norm. On the plus side, it’s easier to find another job, it seems.

I’ve worked in both and disagree. In the private sector the profit motive is the most important factor and it means things get done. Unlike the private sector.

It’s more efficient because it cherry picks services that are able to run more effectively and make money and does not offer those that lose money and harder to prepare for, A&E, ICU, maternity etc.

The NHS could be more efficient and spend less money if we could also get rid of these areas but we can’t.

Maybe a different perspective but I work in private and state schools. The state schools are incredibly efficient with what they achieve. The private schools are not necessarily inefficient but there isn't the same pressure on costs so for example a dt project or cooking project might cost twice as much to run but have the same learning objective.

Or a contractor for the roof will be found and a premium paid for it to be at a convenient time (although all schools suffered with needing big works done in the holidays)

Bad as both are, nothing in my experience, compares to the egos, office politics and general overall fuck-wittery of charities and the so-called "third sector".

I'm a public sector worker, my partner is a private sector worker. I see similar mismanagement from the board which is often fragmented and protecting their own interests. His execs are useless and don't listen to reason. They also waste heaps of money on 'corporate away days' aka a party for no apparent reason which by the way all the staff goes too. Just a few weeks ago was a customer day, which involved about 2 presentations, and then hours of drinking, a BBQ, driving challenges, clay pigeon shooting, rally cars etc. Appalling waste of time and money on the off chance it brought in more business.

No true.
The financial crisis almost bankrupted the whole world and the taxpayer is still suffering the consequences of bailing the bankers out.
The private sector is generally worse imo, because the only thing that matters is money for shareholders.

I’ve seen faffing around in both.

I’ve seen seriously high performing sections of an organisation in the private sector with no ‘dead wood’. I’ve not yet seen that same level of group performance in the public sector. Yes, you get individual high performers but the hangers on are never far away. Short of gross misconduct it seems impossible to fire anyone in the public sector, because the ‘let’s agree you’re shit and pay a settlement’ option doesn’t exist, neither do the redundancy rounds that come with the ups and downs of market variations.

Can both be bad? Absolutely. Does the public sector get the stand out excellent? Very rarely. You’ll get a cluster, but that then gets held up by the system, or the senior management, or the IT. Private sector gets much more discretion on how it spends its money. So can waste stuff on total vanity projects, but also spend on stuff that makes a difference. Public sector is shackled to the process and policies. Even at the small stuff level of buying a round of domino’s for Friday night dinner to get something finished and a round in the pub once it’s done.

I've only worked in the public sector whereas DP runs his own private sector business. The only real difference I see between them is that private sector people are far more used to just doing things (changing strategies, getting mates in to do work, sacking people because they're not to a standard which may or may not exist for other staff) purely because they can. This can be a good thing or bad thing depending.

I am always amused when new managers come into my public sector employer from the private sector. It's never long before rhe penny drops that they can't just do whatever they like. Again, this can be good or bad.

Most of the depts at my work run at a loss from years of underfunding. But they're statutory functions so have to be provided. To work in, it gets soul destroying after a while.

This made me laugh! I’m in higher education and this resonates. As per another poster, nothing can be done without sign off. In this case from the governing body. New minutes template? Ooh better check that with the governing body. Slightly improving administrative procedures? Ooh better check. So tedious and no autonomy.

Working in both sectors there are a lot of similarities. The public sector (CS) has become a lot more corporate than previously. It spends a lot more time keeping people informed about changes in direction and policy.

Compared to similar private companies that offer similar services I find the range of abilities in the public sector are a lot wider, some people are nothing short of inept, so I think there's a bigger "management" element.

Apologies to you competent C Servants but it's true.

It makes more sense to compare big and small organisations than public and private. Private covers everything fom the corner shop to great big multinationals.

Half my family works public sector and half private.

My observations are that bad behaviours are tolerated for far longer in the public sector that would see you pretty quickly dealt with or fired in private.

In addition I’ve been agog reading the NHS Fife employment tribunal reports, no private company I’ve ever worked in large, medium or small would have approached an investigation so badly.

I’m also pretty shocked that a senior leader didn’t apparently know that her personal emails could end up in evidence. How could she be unaware of that?

I've also worked in both and I broadly agree, but what I will say is that the public sector is often hamstrung by decisions made by other people which are just total failures. The biggest of these is NHS procurement - all that buying power is supposed to give us the clout to get good prices on things and instead we end up doing things like paying £1k for a basic laptop that retails for £400 in Currys. It's ridiculous and it shouldn't be allowed to continue.

Yes I left a public sector job because there was a section of us working really hard and then huge chunks of people coasting and looking for people to blame

I don't think either sector should be idealised. There are very able and hard working people in both. It's also possible to climb the career ladder in either not based on ability but down to who you know or sleep with . Since figuring this out I very much am baffled why some people have so much respect for wealth or seniority because it's not an even or fair game at all

Oh I have had to point this out to an annoying number of people! (In public and private sector).

Well look at the state of our water companies where the focus is on profits. To hell with the environment or public health.

Whenever anything goes into private hands like transport, aspects of the NHS etc quality goes to pot as the funds aren't reinvested they go into the hands of the shareholders who don't care about cutting on quality as long as they get their bonuses.

I’m just astonished that as a line manager she wouldn’t have been trained/read up on her responsibilities.

Everyone hates their job, and to reach SMT in any organisation, you have to be willing to use other people to get there.

So, in any organisation, the SMT are just a room full of egos, willing to use, fuck over, bully, or destroy the careers and mental health of anyone who gets in the way of their next promotion. As a result, senior positions are filled with people who have no interest in the job they are doing, they are focused on the job they don't have yet.

The staff at the bottom, the ones doing the actual work, are always underpaid, overworked, used and abused, either by their own colleagues (who want to be part of the SMT) or by the SMT, usually for "evidence" so that their manager can put something on an application form when applying for a position in the SMT.

This is why all services, public and private, don't work for the customers. The customer isn't important to anyone in the organisation.