| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Management Fads
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Management Fads

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Management Fads
    Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 04:05
Well, well, no posts in the Business History subforum.  Let's change that.
 
Many of us either are or have been employed in private or public complex organizations.  As those are difficult to either control or drive to some favorable goal, managements in the last century or so have grasped at catch-all management gimmicks to organize and manage (or make it look so) the complex organizations in their charge.
 
Some of us have been assaulted by "Quality Circles" or "Total Quality Management" or the infamous ISO-9000 and LOL "Six Sigma" managment fads.  There are also disasters such as the conglomerate fad of the 1960s and 70s, and the mirage of the IPO fad of the 1990s.
 
Just some comments (by no means unbiased) from the Web:
 
"Of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91% have trailed the S&P 500 since."
 
The introduction of Six Sigma at 3M Corporation has stifled creativity.
 
ISO-9000 certification only benefits vendors who already have their market niche established, and is used to stifle competition by adding to the costs of competitors who are not so certified.
 
And so on.
 
I worked for a company that tried (and failed) to implement TQM principles to a financial services organization.  This process improvement fad was designed in the 1920s or 30s by a guy named Dening to be applicable to factory work.  The Japanese seized on this in the decades after WW II in their recovery from the war, and it had some success there.  By the 1980s, the US was making garbage products, from cars to appliances, and the management heads in desperation were trying anything to reverse that.  TQM became a fad if not a cult.  I had been through several other fads that tended to come and go like stomach flu.
 
Middle management where I worked tended to pass off the TQM responsibility to both get rid of it and to lay blame elsewhere if it failed.  This was frequently passed off on clerical personnel (easily replaced after all).  It was a freaking disaster.  Meetings took up time trying to implement process improvement to things that had worked for 100 years.  One branch manager wanted to apply TQM to the office coffee makers.  (OK, if you ever experienced office coffee, maybe it was an idea, but it failed too.  Big smile )
 
Google this stuff, and if you can get past the statistical BS - which I doubt very much any board of directors member is really interested in - let's discuss any management fad you are aware of or have had the misfortune to experience.
 
   


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14 Mar 2010 at 04:08
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11686
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 04:52
Great post Pikeshot. I personally don't have experience with six smegma and TQM since I've been in small corps and private practice yet I've talked to those who have and you seem to be on the money regarding the disdain. Now there are a few looking to bolster their own CV by adding such to their resume's but, "if they only knew".

Anyway I hope more posts come out of this thread 'cause it is interesting.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 05:20
Originally posted by Seko Seko wrote:

Great post Pikeshot. I personally don't have experience with six smegma and TQM since I've been in small corps and private practice yet I've talked to those who have and you seem to be on the money regarding the disdain. Now there are a few looking to bolster their own CV by adding such to their resume's but, "if they only knew".

Anyway I hope more posts come out of this thread 'cause it is interesting.
 
It is amazing.  The only persons who seem to think any of this is beneficial are those whose reputations are bolstered by the approbation of others - who think any of this is beneficial.  Smile
 
One management type I know refers to the current(?) fad as "Sick Smegma."  You picked up on the absurdity in your post.
 
Another guy (retired now) worked for a major manufacturer of electrical products with customers in Europe.  He was convinced that the ISO was weighted with European members who were using the certifications as a weapon to discourage non-Euro companies from competing with them.  I have also heard that Microsoft has been criticised for doing the same thing to non-US competitors.
 
It is all cut throat business; the same as always.
 
 
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 14 Mar 2010 at 05:27
Back to Top
DukeC View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1980
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DukeC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 08:43
I haven't really worked with any complex institutions but I seem to be finding economics more interesting lately.
 
The more I learn about it the more it seems like dark art than science. I take my hat off to anyone who can perform successfully in the corporate world.
we have a blind date with destiny..and it looks like she's ordered the lobster
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 10:58
Psst...I'll let you into a little secret: The money is in writing or "inventing" procedures on management to feed the egos of people who must for the life of them be seen to be doing something that's on the critical edge. As with all books of this ilk they are premised upon a systematization that guarantees success through purported efficiencies premised entirely on paper.
 
Just juxtapose Total Quality Management to both Murphy's Law and the Peter Principle and see what you get...
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2010 at 12:46
Many, many kudos to pikeshot for getting the ball rolling in the Business History subforum. I'm embarrassed to admit that I hadn't even looked at this particular corner of our web community before today. It's an interesting area in which I have very little experience, so I'll likely be relying on the rest of you as my instructors. Anyway, just wanted to celebrate the christening of another corner of AE. Smile
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
King
King

Most Glorious Leader of Muzhnopia

Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 5190
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Mar 2010 at 02:35
Hi, Pike,

Great topic.

I believe that there are a few things going on here, so I will address them.

a) Most managers are incompetent idiots. Ah, I said it. It feels good. Okay, now for the elaboration on it. Managing tends to attract incompetent people towards it because it is easier to fake your way into a position, there are no hard metrics on how to judge you, and being in the position where you are not actually doing any real work allows you to use politics to deflect your faults to other people easily.

Because they have nothing to do, they will kill their boredom by changing things for the sake of changing them. In other words, disrupts the lives of those who actually are working.

But we must remember that, as poseurs, most managers are cowards. So how can they safely disrupt work without being blame for its failures?

Enter the management fad.

Just like it is advantageous for sheep to run in herds, because only the weakest members at the edges will actually get hurt, managers run together in a management fad so that they can sabotage the work of productive people without getting blamed for it. If it works, great, they take the glory. When it fails, which is the most probably outcome, then it was the methodology's fault, and everyone at the time was doing it.

b) On the half-hearted, incorrect, and incomplete adoption of methodologies. To be fair, a lot of management fad methodologies have good practices in it. Total Quality Control has many good ideas, and Japan is an example of how successful they can be. Just-in-time inventory/manufacturing can slash a lot o costs, under the right environment,

And let me stress the environment. Without the correct environment, the methodologies are going to fail. It is often the proper environment that makes it possible for the methodologies to succeed. Total Quality Control worked in Japan not because the ideas of Deeming were so great in themselves, the ideas are more or less obvious, but because TQC blends well with the Japanese mindset, and at the time Japan was trying to rebuild itself from the war.

TQC doesn't seem to work well with Americans. After all, it was an American who created the methodology, and it had to wait until the 80s, with the success of Japan, for it to be noticed in this country.

The same applies to other productivity systems. It works very well for the companies that designed it, but it fails everywhere else.

That is because the company culture and personality, which is really a reflection on the personality of the people in management, is often incompatible with productivity, no matter what methodology you adopt.

And a big problem is that when the adoptions are attempted, they are attempted in horrible manners and missing key elements of the methodology out of laziness or personal clash of the technique with the manager in charge.

Often, a lot of these methodologies give some control, respect, and rewards to workers. Well, many managers don't want to give control, respect, or rewards to their workers. They only have that for themselves. So this key element to gain loyalty goes missing.

Also, if the methodology asks for openness, but those who are honest get punished or fired, if that is the culture of the business, it will fail.

Okay, I have more to day in the subject, but I will start a new thread on it.
This post is already too big.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Mar 2010 at 07:00
I agree that middle managers are cowards.  They all run scared, and that is probably the way the egos in the board room like it.  I never met a branch manager I thought anything of.  They were all worthless and weak.
 
However, all managers, even at the highest levels, are sheep.  The fads proliferate because management sees someone do something, and they think "What happens if it works and I don't do it?  It will look bad."  They can justify it to the board because the board is full of other executives at other companies who are probably just as spineless, and who are doing the same things.
 
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2010 at 21:11
People cannot operate without faith in something. At least very few can.
 
People cannot face up to the possibility that the universe is random and uncontrollable: even less can they accept that ther own corner of it is. So they need to believe that someone somewhere is controlling things; that there are methods of controlling them that are assimilable and simple, preferably expressible as slogans. It doesn't really matter, at least in the short term, that they actually work, because if the rituals and incantations called for fail, then that can be explained away as the result of performing the rituals and incantations wrongly.
 
That's human nature. And it simply just transfers to the management world in the form of the fads being discussed here.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2010 at 23:02
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

People cannot operate without faith in something. At least very few can.
 
People cannot face up to the possibility that the universe is random and uncontrollable: even less can they accept that ther own corner of it is. So they need to believe that someone somewhere is controlling things; that there are methods of controlling them that are assimilable and simple, preferably expressible as slogans. It doesn't really matter, at least in the short term, that they actually work, because if the rituals and incantations called for fail, then that can be explained away as the result of performing the rituals and incantations wrongly.
 
That's human nature. And it simply just transfers to the management world in the form of the fads being discussed here.
 
Then we might think of business as a model of prehistoric society with executives as priests monopolizing the economic surplus, and middle management as witch doctors with their rituals and incantations acting as agents of control over the worker bees.  My, how far we have come.  Big smile
 
 
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2010 at 23:34
The origins of the business corporation are premised on anonymity (perhaps that is why in Spanish, the name tells the truth: Sociedad Anonima). Hiding is the game and anonymity the long sought goal by all the players in the group, while efficiency is the play. However, the larger the corporation becomes the greater the possibility for inefficiency and exploitation. Let us invoke the incantations of these marvelous shaman: Macromanagement versus micromanagement, and as gcle implied understand that it is all smoke and mirrors. What is lost in all of this: the distinction between product and profit.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Mar 2010 at 00:58
Your point about the larger the corporation is an important one in discussing socialisation and nationalisation. It's not the ownership that ends up mattering that much, it's simple the extra inefficiency of size. In general it's a pity that people associate public ownership and control with massive size: the two don't necessarily go together.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jul 2011 at 05:46
Could one not speculate that "management fads" in financial organization is what gave us the IMF?
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
Kaveh ye Ahangar

Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: MidX,Engelistan
Status: Offline
Points: 12490
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jul 2011 at 06:56
The learning organisation...

Back to Top
personalgame11 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 13 Oct 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote personalgame11 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Oct 2013 at 19:05
Great post Pikeshot. I in person do not have expertise with six sebum and TQM since i have been in little corps and personal follow nevertheless I've talked to those that have and you appear to air the money relating to the disdain. currently there square measure some wanting to bolster their own CV by adding such to their resume's however, "if they solely knew".


------------------------
Enjoy it
Get free rs gold on www.mmo2buy.com site

Fifacoins2buy.com top is a very professional online store which has a perfect business system.Buy FIFA 13 Coins,Cheap FIFA 14 Coins in fifacoins2buy.com will be your wise choice!

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.