As entrepreneurs, we are always looking for ways to better run our companies. One option is to adapt a battle-tested business management strategy. But what?
There have been too many since time immemorial and some still work including Frederick Taylor’s 18th century Scientific Management Theory which maintains that it is only through enforced standardization of methods, enforced adoption of the best implements and working conditions, and enforced cooperation that faster work can be assured.In more recent memory, various management strategies started popping up: Matrix Management and Six Sigma, among others. It is not uncommon to run into managerial job advertisements looking for people with experience in, say, Six Sigma. Just go to Jobstreet and you’ll see a ton of job openings from big companies—Accenture, HSBC, John Clemens—all looking for belted applicants.
While these strategies are serious (fabulous, some consider), I recently ran into an article by Geoffrey James of bnet.com which debunked eight management strategies in a hilarious manner. I had to share at least two of it:
Matrix
Management
The theory: People with similar skills are pooled for work assignments. For example, all engineers may be in one engineering department and report to an engineering manager, but these same engineers may be assigned to different projects and report to a project manager while working on that project. Therefore, each engineer may have to work under several managers to get their job done.
The reality: An endless, debilitating turf war. Each manager fights to be considered the “real” manager of the personnel. They do this by forcing everybody to attend required “staff meetings” and by finding extra hoops to jump through and extra rocks to fetch, in order to prove that that they’re the ones who are really in charge.
The result: All productive work grinds to an immediate halt. Management becomes completely consumed in arguments over who will do what and when. Because the system creates more managers, the organization quickly becomes top heavy. Eventually, top management figures out that this is a terminally bonehead idea and puts one person in charge.
Opinion: I actually worked in an organization that had matrix management. Everyone reported to three managers, and each manager insisted upon having a mandatory 3 hour meeting every week (no agenda). Their manager also required everyone to attend a one hour mandatory meeting every week — to “facilitate communication.” That was 25% of the work week wasted in nonsense.
Your Strategy: Make sure you can access the Internet inside your company’s conference room. During the unending turf hassles, you can answer emails, surf the web, play games, etc. Otherwise, you have to wait this one out. It won’t last for more than a year.
Six Sigma
The theory: The idea is to improve the quality of your processes by identifying and removing the causes of defects. You assign various people different colored “belts” (like a karate class) based upon their expertise in the Six Sigma methodology. You also get a series of defined steps and quantifiable financial targets.
The reality: It creates a hierarchy of “belted” experts who run around the company pretending that they know how to do other people’s work better than the people who do the work. Endless meetings ensue, with little or no effect. The consulting firm who’s implementing the Six Sigma walks away with a fat paycheck.
The result: Wasted time and wasted effort. According to one quality control expert quoted in Fortune magazine, “of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent have trailed the S&P 500 since.” On the other hand, it’s spawned an entire industry of “consultants” who make a living sucking productivity out of your firm.
Opinion: Oh, please. Potbellied managers running around with little colored belts like they’re part of some Bruce Lee movie on Bizarro world. That’s exactly what’s going to help a company get out of the doldrums. You couldn’t make up this stuff, it’s so incredibly stupid.
Your strategy: If your company implements Six Sigma, you’ll be paying a Six Sigma “tax” for about two years. Push out all activities by about 20 percent to account for the time wasted in pointless meetings. After two years, the managers who implemented it will either be fired or move on, in which case the Six Sigma process will fall by the wayside.
The theory: People with similar skills are pooled for work assignments. For example, all engineers may be in one engineering department and report to an engineering manager, but these same engineers may be assigned to different projects and report to a project manager while working on that project. Therefore, each engineer may have to work under several managers to get their job done.
The reality: An endless, debilitating turf war. Each manager fights to be considered the “real” manager of the personnel. They do this by forcing everybody to attend required “staff meetings” and by finding extra hoops to jump through and extra rocks to fetch, in order to prove that that they’re the ones who are really in charge.
The result: All productive work grinds to an immediate halt. Management becomes completely consumed in arguments over who will do what and when. Because the system creates more managers, the organization quickly becomes top heavy. Eventually, top management figures out that this is a terminally bonehead idea and puts one person in charge.
Opinion: I actually worked in an organization that had matrix management. Everyone reported to three managers, and each manager insisted upon having a mandatory 3 hour meeting every week (no agenda). Their manager also required everyone to attend a one hour mandatory meeting every week — to “facilitate communication.” That was 25% of the work week wasted in nonsense.
Your Strategy: Make sure you can access the Internet inside your company’s conference room. During the unending turf hassles, you can answer emails, surf the web, play games, etc. Otherwise, you have to wait this one out. It won’t last for more than a year.
Six Sigma
The theory: The idea is to improve the quality of your processes by identifying and removing the causes of defects. You assign various people different colored “belts” (like a karate class) based upon their expertise in the Six Sigma methodology. You also get a series of defined steps and quantifiable financial targets.
The reality: It creates a hierarchy of “belted” experts who run around the company pretending that they know how to do other people’s work better than the people who do the work. Endless meetings ensue, with little or no effect. The consulting firm who’s implementing the Six Sigma walks away with a fat paycheck.
The result: Wasted time and wasted effort. According to one quality control expert quoted in Fortune magazine, “of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent have trailed the S&P 500 since.” On the other hand, it’s spawned an entire industry of “consultants” who make a living sucking productivity out of your firm.
Opinion: Oh, please. Potbellied managers running around with little colored belts like they’re part of some Bruce Lee movie on Bizarro world. That’s exactly what’s going to help a company get out of the doldrums. You couldn’t make up this stuff, it’s so incredibly stupid.
Your strategy: If your company implements Six Sigma, you’ll be paying a Six Sigma “tax” for about two years. Push out all activities by about 20 percent to account for the time wasted in pointless meetings. After two years, the managers who implemented it will either be fired or move on, in which case the Six Sigma process will fall by the wayside.
So, are these strategies fads then? Not necessarily. Motorola, the company that created Six Sigma seemed to be doing well still. On the other hand, Yahoo, under the leadership of CEO and founder Jerry Yang thought Matrix Management as a fab strategy, tried it, and failed. He was replaced by Carol Bartz in 2009.
Bottom line, go ahead and read up on management strategies but only select parts that will work for you. You do not have to blindly embrace one strategy over others. You do not have to be boxed in. You can pick and choose.
In the end, a strategy can only be fabulous if it works for you; not if it only works for others.
Is yours fab or fad? You tell me.
No comments:
Post a Comment