informal coalitions

Managing to lead

I've just bought a copy of Henry Mintzberg's latest book, Managing. 

In the intro, he argues the case for management to be reinstated as an equal partner with what he sees as the over-hyped notion of leadership in organizations. Amen to that. 

This is a refreshing change from those who, like Warren Bennis, see leading and managing as separate and distinct roles - with the former seemingly inhabiting a somewhat higher and more praiseworthy plane than the latter:

"I tend to think of the differences between leaders and managers as the differences between those who master the context and those who surrender to it."

Where is the magic in “best practice”?

Last week, as I was facilitating a workshop with a great group of people in Germany, the topic of "best practice" arose. I challenged the idea that the transfer of so-called best practice between organizations was a credible way of improving performance.

Too often, seemingly successful processes, systems and procedures are sought out and then meticulously implanted ‘lock, stock and barrel’ into other organizations. The aim is to transform the performance of those on the receiving end. More often than not, though, the reality falls well short of expectations.

The time machine of organizational decision making

In Technology, Management and Society*, Peter Drucker describes decision making as

“… essentially a time machine which synchronizes into one present a great number of divergent time-spans.” 

“Our approach today,” he goes on, “still tends towards the making of plans for something we will decide to do in the future. This may be a very entertaining exercise, but it is a futile one.”

Incredibly, Drucker first made this statement to a management conference in 1957!  And yet, 50 years on, the notion that present and future decision making are separated in time still dominates management thinking; the former focusing on current operations and the latter on the visions, strategies and plans intended to realise the desired future.

So how do Drucker’s insights on the time dimension of decision making and the need to focus on the present play into current thinking about the dynamics of organizations?

Stacey on Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics

I have been a fan of Ralph Stacey’s work since I first purchased one of his early books (Dynamic Strategic Management for the 1990s) almost 20 years ago. In particular, I have been attracted by his willingness – eagerness even – to challenge conventional thinking and practice in relation to the leadership and dynamics of organizations. The latest edition of his textbook on the subject, Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics, continues this tradition.

The secrets to successful strategy execution - sort of, perhaps!

I was delighted to read the words of Harvard Business Review’s editor, Thomas A. Stewart, in his editorial introduction to the June 2008 edition.  In his piece headed “Tools for Change,” he briefly previews the journal’s lead article, “The Secrets to Successful Strategy Execution”.

In re-stating the authors’ claim that clarifying decision rights and designing information flows are the most important aspects of execution, he points out that “… those [areas] are the least subject to corner-office diktats. They involve dirty hands and messy conversations [my emphasis].” 

Reading this, I eagerly thumbed through the pages of the journal to see what the authors had to say about the messy conversations at the heart of strategy development and delivery …