Dusty image of Prorail is about to change

That there were more organizations involved by delaying every train I’ve ever taken was something I was aware off – that is not entirely true but it feels this way. But which organizations were involved and who is responsible for what is something completely different. That changed after reading an article about Prorail and their new CEO.

‘Het Financieel Dagblad’ published an interview with the new CEO of Prorail Pier Eringa. Not only his salary – 207.000 euro excluding bonuses – of the new CEO led to questions, the interview itself can be described as quite revealing and controversial. With a couple of bold and frank statements he introduced himself to the public. He claimed for example that the employees of Prorail feel like: “they are being urinated on.” That is quite a remarkable and unusual for a CEO to say, especially when you are just been appointed.

Some would say it is a foolish and even an unwise thing to say, but at least Eringa showed some guts. He also stated that the Ministry of Infrastructure pressured ProRail to keep information about exceeds costs behind. This statement even led to a debate where the Secretary of Infrastructure Mansveld had to defend herself against these accusations.

With these daring and controversial quotes Eringa did what he wants his organization to do, namely changing its image. The dusty image – whereby the public doesn’t know what the company exactly does - has to be altered into a new image; whereby the public view Prorail as a vivid and capable company. Eringa explicitly states that it is one of the goals – personal goals – to the change the reputation of the organization. The interview could be a starting point because it created a buzz. Not only for the organization but as well for Eringa himself. When the fuss was reaching its climax some would back off and take the easy way out, but Eringa was not backing down and was not taking back his quotes. Hereby he kept his credibility and reputation.

The question is whether the remarks in the interview were intentional and the interview was a strategy to shake off the old image. It doesn’t seem that way anyway. There is a saying “there is no such thing as bad publicity” and even though this is questionable it did not backfire for Eringa and Prorail (so far). The publication in ‘Het Financieel Dagblad’ and other articles put the focus on the Secretary and it nearly cost Mansveld her job. The whole situation did not have any negative consequences for Eringa and Prorail and it is arguable that he came out of this as a winner.

- Sebastiaan de Vos -

For some reason, I'm not able to write comments under blogposts. I'm not sure why but the system redirects me when I want to send my reply. Therefore I will post it here:

I think Pytrik, 'presured' is meant as 'pressured'? If yes, I suppose when it is emphasized in the press that he withdrawed some of his remarks under pressure, his image will change. As a CEO your credibility will decrease when you’re not continuous in your own point of view. Of course when you make a mistake you can admit it, but in this case I think the image of the CEO will be damaged because he contradicts himself under pressure.

Elsa Govaarts.