Drucker was committed to the fact that it is management's role to REMOVE obstacles and support people in getting their jobs done. Too many managers have no understanding of what it takes to get work done, and build in too many meetings, useless reports and procedures.....

posted September 12, 2007

Comments from others here are all spot on, but Drucker's comment goes much deeper. Drucker's comment was also aimed at how people *feel* at, and about, their work. In a nutshell, it's all about positive reinforcement.

Workers who feel they are contributing to some greater good and can "sense real progress toward meeting that greater good", tend to value themselves more highly as workers and tend to perceive fewer barriers to getting the work done. This is where management comes in.

Managers who reinforce the workers' positive contribution to meeting some goal in turn instill a greater sense of team effort and thus build greater work satisfaction (feelings). Managers who do not communicate positively with their employees tend to build negativity in the workplace and as the comment states, "make it difficult for people to do word" - more and larger barriers.

As managers, we recognize that there are varying degrees of worker performance in others as well as ourselves. Positive reinforcement increases productivity and satisfaction even when we and others are not working to our full potential. Negative or no reinforcement decreases productivity.

Recognizing the value of positive reinforcement and openly communicating with our employees is what managers can do to reduce real and perceived difficulties for people to do their work. This is how I interpret Drucker's comment.

posted September 12, 2007

When I was working at XYZ company (fictitious name) sometimes had to buy books to get some research done for a client. However the manager asked me to fill out a form 2 weeks in advance of when I wanted to have this item purchased. After approval which could take several days if at all, there was another process where another person would than have to shop several vendors for the best price.

This came to a point where I went ahead and just paid for the item myself in order to get the work done.
Now trying to get this reimbursed was another story. The finance officer had to get the original receipt plus I had to show her the book, than a week later I had to show the book again to the manager so she could verify that I actually bought this book.

So there was a lot of management happening. What was managed is the purchase of a book. However the structure in which this was supposed to happen was simply not workable, this however made no impression on this manager. It was more important to her to make sure that everything was within policy and structure than actually satisfying the client and getting the work done.

So yes Terrence often management has a way of making people's jobs more difficult. Simply, what's missing is an alignment in terms of vision, purpose and core values, than company policies and structures.

Once this occurs results come easy.

This should do for starters.

Sunny regards,

Bjorn

Bjorn Martinoff
Managing Director
F1C Inc. www.fortune100coach.com

bjorn@fortune100coach.com

posted September 12, 2007

I have a slightly different take on what Drucker means by this.

Management processes, broadly speaking, are in place to "magnetize" people in the organization toward acting in a consistent way, in the same direction. Everybody singing out of the same songbook.

The error that many people make is thinking that they can use process as a substitution for independent thought and action - and still succeed.

There are also classes of managers who manage change by making sure change is hard to come by - and so may look competent by some arbitrary metric to game their individual corporate system. Nothing ventured, nothing screwed up.

These managers are not necessarily bad people - it may totally be a self-defense mechanism. If failure is always punished in an organization, guess what - you will over time have a totally risk averse operation on your hands, and management will coalesce toward supporting the status quo. Risk aversion goes hand in hand with how difficult people find it do accomplish real "work" within an enterprise.

I've always said that 90% of my job is not project management - it is expectation management. If we expect little from our managers we'll probably get very little of actual value in return.

The unspoken corallary to Drucker's statement is that "competent workers will find a way to do their jobs, in spite of the obstacles placed in their path by management."

posted September 12, 2007

Management in itself is not bad. Without management there will be chaos. However there are two types of management – bad and good.

The former is bureaucratic that thwarts innovation and slows progress where processes and rules exist to safeguard ineffective managers. It makes it easier for non-performing individuals to stay in positions of power. Peter Drucker was essentially referring to “bad management” when he said, “Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to get their work done.”

Then there is good management which is a critical component to the success of a company. This type of management is about creating processes that maximizes productivity, eliminates barriers and facilitates people to accomplish their work goals easily. It is the responsibility of management to ensure that every company has processes that can be understood and followed by ordinary individuals. They must be simple, repeatable and optimized so that the quality of the end product is consistently guaranteed. We need these processes because remember what Mr. Drucker said, “No institution can possibly survive if it needs geniuses or supermen. It must be organized in such a way as to be able to get along with average human beings.”

posted September 12, 2007

There happens to be a basic misunderstanding about what a manager should do in order to achieve results. This lies in the view that a manager should issue directions and control the achievement of specific tasks/projects. Management skills are, in this view, mostly technical and task related. Too often the emphasis on the specific task/project does not allow for an adequate care as to relationships, engagement, support, motivation and climate in groups and organizations. Managers who are not aware of leadership skills for themselves and others will surely make things difficult for people who do work.

posted September 13, 2007

It means that we are all too busy watching the score instead of getting on with it, walking the shop and understanding our role and how we could help our leaders (the people on the ground) add value to our clients.

posted September 12, 2007

The way I see it, different folks in the organization have their own priorities, and they would follow their own priorities, without much thought about what impact these might have on the overall organizational priorities. For example, ever wondered why two parts of the same organization end up competing against each other, for the same customer business?

In addition, you find that 4 different people find the same report in 5 different formats, not giving you enough tie to actually work.

posted September 12, 2007

There are few more examples in the history, when people thought overwhelming administration is causing huge friction:

- Constantine the Great when he moved Roman Empery capital to Black Sea
- Peter the Great when he mover Russian capital to Saint Petersburg
- Chairman Mao when he started Cultural Revolution

I ask my good Chinese friend about terrible Cultural Revolution and how Chinese people could let such happened. Surprisingly, he told me:

Forget what you heard about it from non Chinese sources. It was one greatest governing decision that preserved modern China. Chinese administration has exploded and was so powerful and sophisticated that nothing was possible any more until Chairman Mao decided to sweep all them and start from scratch. He told me then that Constantine the Great and Peter the Great were Chairman Mao’s inspiration then.

Drago Pejic, M. Sc., F.L.M.I.
http://www.dataintegrityinstitute.com

Links:

• http://www.dataintegrityinstitute.com/productsandservices.htm

posted September 12, 2007

I agree with the other answers, but let me add this quote from Upton Sinclair that I recently found in a book entitled "Super Crunchers" by Ian Ayres.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it".

posted September 12, 2007

I agree absolutely with Ray. Management is about enabling (facilitating) work.

A great deal of so called management is not management at all. Many people with manager in their job title are no such thing.

posted September 12, 2007

Drucker's comment certainly applies to the public sector and perhaps with a "force multiplier" for a few reasons. 1) The "silo" or "turf" problem is compounded by the distinction county level government must make among employees due to a unionized workforce, work rules and other conditions dictated by the collective bargaining agreement. I recognize this might not apply in "right to work" states. 2) One must also contend with much of management being driven (or not) by elected officials in the executive and legislative branches. 3) And there is also the matter of OPM - other people's money. I probably need not elaborate.

On the lighter side, what I think Drucker meant was to get Scott Adams to start cartooning and create Dilbert. If Dilbert has a quotation posted in his cubicle, my money would be on Drucker's above.

posted September 12, 2007

Get out of the way.

posted September 12, 2007

To coin a phrase:

"Lead, follow or get out of the way"

Eileen

posted September 12, 2007

I believe he meant that theier is a lack of focus on the goals of the organization and alignment of those goals with operations. This lack of focus has resulted in creating layers operational complexities without assessment of potential impacts to employee productivity, speed to market and profitability. A good read from HBR is "Innovation vs Complexity" by Mark Gottfredson.

posted September 12, 2007

Meetings, meetings, meetings, this report, that report... no time left in the day to actually accomplish work tasks.

posted September 12, 2007

In the classic definition of management, there are five elements: (1) Planning, (2) Organizing, (3) Staffing, (4) Directing , and (5) Controlling. Managers/executives tend to be better at some of these than others. And, since most managers are selected initially because of their technical expertise/experience, managers tend not to have appropriate amounts of what Blanchard calls "supportive behaviors" in his Situational Leadership model.

My favorite quote around this is by good ol' President George Washington:

"One of the difficulties in bringing about change in an organization is that you must do so through the persons who have been most successful in that organization, not matter how faulty the system or the organization is. To such persons, you see, it is the best of all possible organizations, because look who was selected by it and look who succeeded the most within it. Yet, these are the very people through who we must bring about improvements."

Hmmmmmmmmm. Now, THERE is a thought to grow on!

posted September 12, 2007

A lot of management is just about maintaining status quo of how things are and avoiding surprises, negative or positive. To do that companies come up with rules or "guidelines" for keeping things the way they are.

The problem arises when the front line staff have to deal with changing market conditions, regulations, trends, etc., and stilll be within the guidelines of management.

It's a constant struggle to balance the needs of the management and interest of the organizations customers, clients and other constituents. Companies that do it well succeed. Companies that don't do it well, die.

posted September 12, 2007

Too many people (alleged managers) don't understand the difference between motion and progress. Working harder is not, necessarily, working smarter.

posted September 12, 2007

I believe that he suggested that so called managers ( I call them bullies ) spend so much of their time demoralizing, micro managing, demotivating, and devaluing team members, that those same team members who are responsible for performance are left with little capacity to perform at a peak level. The research that was done on this fully supported this view.

posted September 12, 2007

I really have echo Tej when saying:

"It's a constant struggle to balance the needs of the management and interest of the organizations customers, clients and other constituents. Companies that do it well succeed. Companies that don't do it well, die."

In addition, LEADERS need to have the will and the skill to not just learn, but ANTICIPATE positive solutions to changing market conditions, regulations, trends, etc. for a win-wins for all stakeholders.

As I saw at company XYZ, no one can afford the time to learn, keep up with customers, and constituents, and answer to processes that don't align with changing market conditions. As I have also seen at company XYZ-unnamed sales and deadlines are at stake when they don't match.

Best,

SD

posted September 13, 2007

Management is a Process. And Process is a discipline. The fundamental difference between a "Drill" and a "Discipline" is that, the former is enforced while the latter is internal. Drucker meant that we twisted in our pants to make policies and procedures in an era when Principles should drive the business processes. There is a lesson in that simple statement - if one wants to implement an organization to work, it is most important to contextualize to the the external environment and internal capabilities and define processes that will serve the strategic cause of a business. Business is about taking decisions and people in the business need systems and empowerment to make them effectively.

posted September 13, 2007

IMHO, most management policies, if they ever served a useful purpose, were instituted for a one-off time and place. Seldom do I see policies that empower team members, address the goals of the organization or foster morale. Management at its highest and best is a Servant's Role to enable all others to reach their potential and further the goals of the organization.

posted September 13, 2007

Too many managers are focused on maintaining their titles and prestige in an organization. To that end, they establish too many rules, procedures and so forth, to generate metrics to take to their management to show how good they are. And to this self-serving end, they're not spending much time allocating resources or motivating the team. Ultimately, management's self-serving nature and ego gets in the way of helping teams.

posted September 13, 2007