Why in Policy Governance is the word “service” so adamantly opposed?
There is nothing wrong with the word or the concept of service; the word denotes a noble human activity. The problem arises when the word obscures the omission of just what human change (improvement, alteration) is supposed to occur for whom and the degree of such change that justifies resources consumed in other words, what the activity we call service is for rather than what it does. In Policy Governance terms, service however important and well-intended is classified as means, not ends. Service is not virtue in itself, but exists for specifiable benefit to someone other than the server.
