I recently had a chance to talk to Henry Mintzberg in Toronto. I can't beat the description someone made of Mintzberg as being like the Mick Jagger of the management world. He's influenced the thinking of a field for decades now.
But Mintzberg has the feeling that American management has gone off the rails and that they've been running down the intangible capital of their organizations. (Mintzberg avoids fancy terms like 'intangible capital', that's my own interpretation of his ideas.)
Basically Mintzberg sees an organization as a community committed towards each other and a common purpose. The managers in the organization have grown up there, and know the products, culture, customers and history. They are, to use his phrase, managers not MBAs.
I remember Arie de Geus talking about an ethic amongst Shell managers that they first and foremost wanted to ensure they didn't leave their function worse off than when they took over. I can't imagine many managers saying that these days (though Steve Kerr did say that to me about his work at GE, but then he's an incredible guy).
This ethic of stewardship seems crazy and it seems crazy because it expresses a respect for the continuity of the organization and one's subordination to the greater good. These ideas are certainly out of favour.
Mintzberg even warns us against leadership. Why? Because leadership necessarily implies followership. Why don't we talk about followership--becuase it does not seem like a helpful construct. But we can't have one without the other. The trouble with talking about leadership is that it tends towards elitism, egoism and a focus on the heroic individual not the great community.
What Mintzberg is doing is issuing a warning. It's a warning that what everyone is saying is best practice may be based on a world view that is harmful to the health of organizations.
I remember someone from a Fortune 100 company telling me that the company was being held together by the dedication and skill of old-timers who had yet to unlearn the old ethic; but that those being promoted were the people with the fastest tongues and slickest powerpoints.
Acting in a way contrary to the masses is hard. But if you feel that your approach to management is that it's all about long term commitment to the community that is your organization take courage--you are probably not out-of-date, you are probably cutting edge.
http://changethis.com/44.06.ConnectionCulture
with humane individualized personal touch and care, a people's organisation that dares with care - rather than a mechanized system of people at work, loosing their self, succumbing with fear to the needs of mechanized outputs and productivity in a do or die manner with undue emphasis on the deliverables sans the human face in a fast paced globe,
devoid of hierarchy or rigid job descriptions and too much emphasis on the deliverables and the evaluative MBO approach creating fear of loss of performance - leading to loss of being at peace and becoming defensive and overcompetitive in attitude protecting one's job and growth at the cost of others,
draining organisation's energy and creativity and spoiling the beauty of human relationships and natural networking at a human pace aiming at quantum growth minimising the human spaces and concerns, all aimed at targets/results and ROI,
sans personal/organisation emotional investments through the core leaders who matter, all geared towards the selfish monetary incentives/rewards and training people towards these, loosing the meaning of life in the process; making people want early retirement or creating early redundancy by labeling people as performers and non-performers, winners and loosers creating an artificial talent crunch, moving towards a community with psychonucleur war with short-term competitive victories and longterm human devastation which could lead towards the doomsday on the distant horizon as being predicted by many in the biblical sense, recession, etc.
maybe one could revisit the gandhian leadership with a vision and space for all with inclusiveness for the man in the village enriching his quality of life whether moral, social or economic through a shared evolving democratic approach with a social consciousness, collaboration and integration through panchayatraj, say community quality circles.
i have attempted to impulsively pen down my running thoughts which could be raw and may need refinement of tone, more as a response to the post by Creelman - for the moment.
we know how Lee Iacoca was crucified, and also we have the role model of jack welch leading to positive change and growth with people involvement and inspired organisational energy on the 9'9'scale of inspirational leadership, where we need a quantum jump of such organisational style rather than a few island spaces as an oasis in a desert -
hope the hrd movement will add value without succumbing to the pressures of MBO/ROI etc. keeping the growth humane at the same time without revisiting the stresses of industrialisation again on a globalised plane under the garb of systems and goals sans the human touch and meaning of life in it's wholesomeness.