Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  What would...

    Posted 04-07-1998 10:35
    This is an energetic exchange about what would a company without management
    look like and what people who do not want management look like. I am still
    thinking about the questions and an answer.

    What amazes me is the number of references to books and the number of quotes
    that appear. I value our own thinking more than anything. I don't want to read
    about it as much as I want to hear (see) people's thinking. Rather, let us be
    the authors and start new thought.

    B. Golden

    Later.


  • 2.  What would...

    Posted 04-07-1998 12:10
    On Tue, 7 Apr 1998, Barbgolden wrote:

    > This is an energetic exchange about what would a company without
    > management look like and what people who do not want management look
    > like. I am still thinking about the questions and an answer.
    >
    > What amazes me is the number of references to books and the number of
    > quotes that appear. I value our own thinking more than anything. I don't
    > want to read about it as much as I want to hear (see) people's thinking.
    > Rather, let us be the authors and start new thought.

    Quite right. We condemn students for lacking in originality and
    creativity, yet we are probably to blame for it. Source quoting kindly
    relieves us from the tedium of analytical and critical thinking. Suppose
    students answered these questions on an essay in similar fashion? How
    would they be graded?

    Q: What would an organization look like that did not want management?
    A: See Drucker, P. On Management

    Q: What would an organization look like that did not need management?
    A: See Peters, T. In search of excellence.


    ______________________
    Great Optimism,

    Dutch Driver
    Abilene, TX
    Hm. Telephone: 915.698.7217
    mailto:ddriver@cs1.mcm.edu


  • 3.  What would...

    Posted 04-07-1998 12:32
    >We condemn students for lacking in originality and
    creativity, yet we are probably to blame for it. Source quoting kindly
    relieves us from the tedium of analytical and critical thinking.<

    Yes, if I can add, we are not asking a question so we can receive "the" answer
    on our doorstep. We are asking so we can discover an emerging answer together.


  • 4.  What would...

    Posted 04-07-1998 14:21
    unsubscribe
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Dutch Driver <ddriver@CS1.MCM.EDU>
    To: MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU <MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
    Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 11:19 AM
    Subject: Re: What would...


    >On Tue, 7 Apr 1998, Barbgolden wrote:
    >
    >> This is an energetic exchange about what would a company without
    >> management look like and what people who do not want management look
    >> like. I am still thinking about the questions and an answer.
    >>
    >> What amazes me is the number of references to books and the number of
    >> quotes that appear. I value our own thinking more than anything. I don't
    >> want to read about it as much as I want to hear (see) people's thinking.
    >> Rather, let us be the authors and start new thought.
    >
    >Quite right. We condemn students for lacking in originality and
    >creativity, yet we are probably to blame for it. Source quoting kindly
    >relieves us from the tedium of analytical and critical thinking. Suppose
    >students answered these questions on an essay in similar fashion? How
    >would they be graded?
    >
    >Q: What would an organization look like that did not want management?
    >A: See Drucker, P. On Management
    >
    >Q: What would an organization look like that did not need management?
    >A: See Peters, T. In search of excellence.
    >
    >
    >______________________
    >Great Optimism,
    >
    >Dutch Driver
    >Abilene, TX
    >Hm. Telephone: 915.698.7217
    >mailto:ddriver@cs1.mcm.edu


  • 5.  What would...

    Posted 04-07-1998 20:16
    Okay, here's a couple of thoughts ....

    A company without management would, in my opinion, look like anything it wanted to. Management, in my experience, is a very misunderstood concept which extends from direct (read autocratic) rule to complete laissez faire (read chaos) management. Academically it is studied by looking at what the so-called 'good' organisations are doing with a view to identifying and analysing their traits in order to teach them. But if history and not academia was the teacher we would find that the so-called 'good' organisations aren't looking at what others' are doing, they are going ahead and blazing their own trail.

    I do a lot of work in leadership and strategic management and I hear a lot of theorists telling others that what is needed is a good solid business plan and the right team to make it work. My experience is that this is true - up to a point. In the areas I've been working in, the most successful people have tried planning but found that - (a) the only ones who've loved the plan have been the banks, and (b) the moment a plan is developed it is immediately out of date and in need of change. As a result they've found that they have to spend too much time writing and reviewing plans that they can't use and which are only used by others. Planning, for the successful people, has been a waste of time because they rarely know what is around the next corner but by golly they're going to look and then make their plan. Their business plan is one simple statement: Do it!

    So, in my experience the organisation without management has either been totally chaotic - run by unions or inept people passing themselves off as managers, or have been brilliantly successfully, run by staff and people passing themselves off as leaders (and doing it brilliantly).

    As for the next question, what do people who don't want management look like?, I must respond: there is an old adage that says if you want to practice good management, management yourself first. Then others will follow.

    People who don't want management, and here I'm drawing from a lot of years in both management, teaching management and in the military, are people who want leadership. They don't want to be 'managed' (who does?), they want to be led. And if they can't find the right dose of leadership at the top of the organisation they will find it from within the rank and file.

    Consider, for example, organisations who have strong management leadership. Look closely at how strong a hold the unions have on their staff. In most cases the union leadership will be less volatile, more cooperative and focussed on the needs of the organisation as well as its people. On the other hand, organisations with weak management leadership invariably have a strongly unionised workforce, a more than average rate of strikes, and perpetually disgruntled staff - at all levels. (Here I mean management at all levels, not just at the top. Lee Iacocca was brilliant but Ford still had strong unions - simply because such brilliance wasn't always matched further down the line.)

    My country (Australia) is about to be shut down by the unions because one element of industry has had some pretty pathetic management leadership for nearly a century now. In fact most industries that came out of the industrial revolution suffer much the same problems (here and overseas), management that doesn't know of nor believe in leadership at all levels of the organisation. Why? Because they have often never had to. Management has always been about banging heads or rolling over and playing dead - on the part of both sides of the industrial fence. As a result management is a dirty word, and pity help any rank and file member who graduates from worker to manager - instant scab.

    So, where does the leadership in these industries come from? From the union - simply because no-one else is prepared to provide it.

    If you want to study a good treatise on management vs non-management, read Lord of the Flies (the original book). This book, I believe, is a study of humankind that will pass the tests of time.

    These have been interesting questions. I too have watched the quotes flashing backwards and forwards so I'm glad Barbara threw in her suggestion.

    Phil Rutherford
    --------------------------------------------
    P D Rutherford & Associates Pty Ltd
    Competency-based systems specialists
    0011 61 2 6230 4823
    robnphil@ozemail.com.au


  • 6.  What would...

    Posted 04-08-1998 19:21
    What would oan organisation without management look like?

    Would it be an organisation without access to capital?

    There are a number of theories - the agency theory and the labour process
    theory of Braverman, for instance, as well as Marx - which suggest that
    management is an activity (and a class?) which comes as a result of the
    requirements of capital. Those who put up the money want to control what
    happens with it.

    BTW, I think that inclusion of sources helps. If I know nothing, or little
    of labour process theory, or have for the moment forgotten that MArx may
    have written something relevant to the topic, I think it is helpful to be
    reminded. New thought does not meean rediscovering everything, but can mean
    extension, application and elucidation.

    In the introductory course in Work and Organisations taught in the
    University of South Australia, there is an attempt to expose students to a
    range of views on the role of mamnagement, as well as discussion of the
    techniques that managers might use.

    Howard Harris
    School of Management
    University of South Australia

    --
    Howard & Merran Harris
    17 Holder Road, Hove SA AUSTRALIA 5048
    Email: harris@dove.net.au phone: +618 8296 0825