Can we stop using this phrase?
On one hand it is uttered in frustration. It is a clear statement that someone has reached the end of their tether, reached a state of such frustration that they are paralysed and can act no further. And are ultimately resigned to their fate.
On the other hand it has come to represent a cop-out, an abdication of responsibility. After all, it is easier to say this than to take action.
It’s not what it is because it just is. It is what it is because someone made a decision that led to it being what it is.
That decision was based on a policy which was based on a principle that had a good intention behind it. But the implementation was flawed, a bureaucrat flagged it, did not think about the intention behind the policy and blocked it. Now the victim has to backtrack, start over again or figure out a way around it.
There should be a new policy and that policy should force the drafter and signatories of that policy to endure the committees, processes and various forums that result from that policy, to actually experience what it means to follow a procurement process, an expense claim process or a data management process.