Two streams of thought in management today

In a recent discussion about finding a suitable synonym for "human capital", my friend and colleague, Madelyn Blair, put her finger on the key issue: " human capital would be - ah - people."

There are thus two deep streams in management in today.

They are like oil and water. We can pretend that they are just evolutions or developments or nuances or verbal nitpicks and that it would be divisive to draw sharp distinctions between them.

But the reality is that these two ways of interacting with the world are incompatible and don't have much to say to each other.

One stream is about turning into people into things--human resources, human capital, social capital--which can be manipulated as things to produce goods and services (MORE THINGS) or profits (MONEY) for the organization and its shareholders. A dispiriting activity for all involved.

The other stream is about inspiring people (i.e (PEOPLE) doing work to generate continuing delight for clients and customers (also known as PEOPLE).

One is a simple linear activity under the control of management. And if it isn't under their control, the object is to get it under their control, as soon as possible.

The other is a complex undertaking in which only successive approximations can make progress to the goal. No one is in control. It is an interaction, a conversation, a joint voyage of discovery. The aim is delight. Generating that is more fun than fun.

The first stream is dying. Its day is done.

The second stream is the future.

The first stream nevertheless continues to grind forward, oblivious, pursuing with furious energy its reorganizations, its downsizings, its outsourcings, and wondering why its ROA continues to decline.

The second stream is discovering that there is a different way to organize and manage work, that leads to productivity increments, continuous inovation, deep job satisfaction and client delight. It's called radical management.

Comments

[Eurekastories]

Amen. And it is the first stream - as you define it - that gives 'management' a bad name.

[Leighdryden]

Thats the problem we all try to control and ring fence people, process and practices when the essence of success comes from creating a system that allows people to get their job done, to deliver business results and goals and to be all undertaken in a framework which is flexible, transparent and repeatable....the ultimate responsibility lies with the individual and not his or her boss, radical maybe not good sense oh yes indeed.

[Jacques Vis]

It is the old couple: es und du/I and thou from Martin Buber, aptly elaboreted by Terry Warner and his Arbinger institute.
Easy to talk about and hard to embody.
The deathstruggle of "old management" is a view we shall see for a while.

[Taffydavies]

Good sense indeed but the radical aspect of management is to enable managers to let go of the stream 1 constraints and the way things have always been done - this is where attention needs to be focused. It is amazing how positvely people respond when they are empowered to deliver and make decisions themselves rather than feel manipulated to produce THINGS for MONEY.

[Russ P]

I think you might have answered your questions later in the newsletter. What could be better than a relatively small group of intelligent and educated people working together like in Florence and at the time of the U.S. Revolution? Its been almost 40 years but the book "Small is Beautiful" may be as relevant today as when published.

[Carolinejohnstone]

As an HR professional of many years, I preferred Personnel because it focussed on people. Human Resources as a title was an attempt to demonstrate that the function was actually business focussed and could make strategic decisions. The best HR professionals do that while balancing the best in people. A title is a title; we name things because we need to. And it means different things to different people, as any "name" or title does... but fundamentally, people are NOT resources - they are people. And yes, I agree that to continue to grind forward merely looking at people as resources is at crisis point - honour the individuals, respect that they will usually want to do their best, allow them the freedom to work and take the risks they need to take, and who knows where that might lead..

[TheLeaderLab]

Do you think these two ways are just the evolution of Theory X and Theory Y?

[JonThorne]

While I totally agree the 2nd stream is the future ... I feel we need to go into the 2nd stream ... determined to make it work.

For example ... I have managed teams and communities using the 2nd stream ... (often having to defend against the 1st stream people shutting it down) ...

... and the main challenge of the 2nd stream is that people always reinvent the wheel and take uncoordinated action.

So for me it means that 2nd stream needs a way of sharing best practice that is inline with the values of the 2nd stream ie it is not a one size fits all method and NO targets

Cheers Jon

[Laurence Lock Lee]

I'm totally aligned with the second stream, but I'm not sure that the streams can be totally independent. For example, I was working yesterday with a large social services agency, made up of real people who really care about what they are doing, but unfortunately "locked up" inside the machine of service delivery. See my blog post http://governanceandnetworks.blogspot.com/2010/05/press-1-if-you-want-us-to-treat-you.html. The growing queues at the counters are real and pressing and being addressed by stream 1 management. Can we have faith that a stream 2 approach will alleviate the queue issue?

[JonThorne]

I agree with you Laurence.

I also think we need to accept that people focused organisations ... have weaknesses … as with most things in life.

I have had several people focused projects shut down by the traditional managers.

The argument that enabled them to do this was this ...

Jon's project will lead to lots of well meaning and motivated people rush off and do similar things slightly differently ... in an uncoordinated way ... burning resources as they go ... forgetting to reflect and learn from each other ... delivering expensive, inefficient, inconsistent organisations / services.

As I could not provide an answer ... other than ... trust me it will work ... my project was shut down.

What is needed is a way of herding cats ... without introducing methods, accreditation, documents, training and websites.

If I provide a practical way of doing this ... I feel I can counter the argument of traditional management attitudes

have a great weekend

[Health News]

Thank you for introducing me the wonderful information.And .....Totally boring.!

[ragazze russe]

What an excellent blog! Thats the problem we all try to control and ring fence people, process and practices when the essence of success comes from creating a system that allows people to get their job done, to deliver business results and goals and to be all undertaken in a framework which is flexible, transparent and repeatable...

[Malin Akerman]

I also think we need to accept that people focused organisations ... have weaknesses … as with most things in life.

[burning fat]

The Leader's Guide to Radical Management: Two streams of thought in management today