The obsolescence of management

Management is the buzzword that we have lived by in our professional life. Well managed companies are studied and emulated as they connote better performance, more productivity and higher profits. Researchers have traditionally made huge strides in developing frameworks of management that have become parts of higher degree programmes in the field of business and non-business. Subjects like planning, staffing, controlling have all become "the" laws to be followed in the management vocabulary and dictionary. However, lately a debate is brewing up on whether this religious adherence to management principles is the real answer to the problems of a world that is very different from when these management mantras were invented.
This debate started in the beginning of the 21st century when in the 2006 to 2009 a worldwide recession took place and many of the high and mighty role model management names fell from the performance/profit pedestal. Lehman Brothers and otherscame tumbling down as they failed to survive the economic meltdown. This set off introspection on why these management role models not only stumbled but completely crashed. Most of these companies were headed by the most famous Harvard and other Ivy league educated CEOs and seniormanagement and yet they could not manage the crisis. There were many articles written to mock the expensive CEO payouts where the leader is paid a phenomenal sum of money even if the company gets bankrupt and the CEO is fired he comes out richer and more valuable.
This led to a revisit on the Management theories and practices and there were multiple articles written on the subjects like "What the Harvard MBA doesn't teach you". Most analysts and writers commented on the flaws in the traditional management model. Stephen Covey the famous author of 8th Habit said "Most companies are overmanaged and underled". These were all pertinent observations based on the fact that if the 21st century is completely different from the 20th century, thenmanagement practices have to be radically different to make an impact on this changing world.
The 20th century saw organizations practice management science and experience great returns on productivity and profitability. They saw that when organizations and individuals were more planned, more organized, more controlled, more output focused performance peaked. Organizations following this path made more net worth than GDPs of countries. Big names like Nestle, Toyata, Citibank had more revenues that beat countries like Pakistan and many more. This model of expansion gave the hope of a 21st century that will reap even more benefits due to the information explosion. However, the start of this century saw the bubble burst and the big names tumble one after the other. After the recovery attempts in 2010 the organizational soul searching began and it was discovered that the ruthless pursuit of output and reckless focus on expansion based on managing and controlling people as well as machines led to this crash. The traditional way of dealing with the most important resource that is human beings has raised many questions on these practices. Some of these concepts of management definitely need a revisit and revision. Let us look at some management terminology that are not just words or designations but mindsets.
- Superior and subordinate: These words signify a superior inferior relationship. Over a period of time this has transferred from a more military environment of command and control to the organizational management field. The superior gives orders and the subordinate obeys. This concept of management is still practiced as organizations follow hierarchies where the organizational chart becomes the chief navigational tool to understand who rules over whom. In today's world this subordination is no longer possible as the generation coming from knowledge era is much more demanding and smart and wants more decentralization and empowerment. Thus, the concept of associates and partners in designations is much more acceptable.
- Auditing and controlling: These are two words and two departments in an organization that are resented on its very functional description. Auditors are supposed to assess compliance with rules and policies and point out deviations. They have become the dreadful snoopers who are always trying to undermine the work of other departments. Similarly the traditional designation of a Financial Controller is of a man who is anti-people spending and will try to control budgets of other departments without knowing the nature of the spending. With flatter organizations and more empowered departments it is imperative that they are re-designated as compliance partners and financial enablers.
- Recruitment and training: These are terms that can easily be used for a circus company where you recruit animals and train them to perform various acts. Human beings need to be on boarded and socially acclimatized. The traditional concept of hiring and firing needs to be made more human by taking employees through various learning and development initiatives to help them understand their personalities and the personalities of their main stakeholders. With millennials of very complex backgrounds entering workplaces the process of enculturation needs to be more diverse than just putting them through a simple orientation programme.
- Talent management: These words themselves connote a contradiction. People with talent don't want to be managed. Organizations spend a lot on hiring the best talent and then trying to fit them into job descriptions that may not match their talent. Many brilliant workers of the knowledge era want to express their own aptitudes and passion rather than be slotted in pre-designed job boxes. The Googles of the world are more successful because they have adjusted to this reality and give that space to their creative people to design their own hours, work and have a share in decisions that affect them.
The millennials who are born in the information age are too smart and independent to be working under excel sheets that are religiously updated on numbers every second. What is required by the organizations is to tap on this generation's know what and then with their consent and participation create mutual know how to carry out their jobs. All those earlier management theories of X and Y and Z are as relevant today as the dial up internet connection. What is needed is to create organizations that allow this generation to manage themselves in jobs that stir their passion to an extent where command, supervision and control become redundant.
(The writer can be reached at [email protected])