| 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. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Controversy edit
It appears that the reference to Liff's contract with the Department of Labor is more about Ray Jefferson and doesn't really belong here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.224.221.156 (talk) 03:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Liff was the recipient of the contracts.Labor Watch (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
It appears to be one of several contracts reviewed and thus a controversy about Jefferson not Liff, agree it belongs but in context.Mheaddem (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC)Mheaddem.
Re: The Notablity issue. Speaking as someone working within the federal government, what Stewart Liff achieved was beyond unusual. When looking for advice on how to transform a very poorly performing governmental organization into a top performer, Stewart Liff is the only person I know of who both achieved such a transformation and also teaches how to do it. So to say that Stewart Liff isn't notable is to also say that high performance within government doesn't matter. Management within government differs from that within the commercial world. As someone who's worked in both sectors, I can state management within government is more challenging. So I'd vote for recognizing Stewart as notable. added by Ray Delcher