Should managers relinquish power?
A Welsh academic has claimed that conventional management is a strangle-hold blocking the path to success.
University of Glamorgan academic Paul Thomas is challenging the management skills of managing directors, chief executive officers, executive chairmen and boards of directors that has been the blueprint for business since industrialisation, reports Walesonline.
Dr Thomas, a man with a history of troubleshooting and who founded management consultants DNA B2B, argues that democratising the workforce, empowering staff and, above all, trusting them, can be the catalyst for success.
According to the academic, conventional management structures are based on dated military hierarchical models, and he believes that their deficiencies are being magnified by the present global economic crisis.
Dr Thomas claims that he has already seen the results in the companies and public sector organisations across Wales and the UK with which he has worked.
Taking levels of management out of an organisation is a brave step, but doing so might provide the fillip it needs, he told the news provider.
"This is about adding value, not tinkering with the structure," says Dr Thomas.
"We are very much focused on power and control here in the UK, and that is something we have to break. We have to get away from the traditional process."
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
YouTube
Comments
Management de-layering has been happening for years so I don't think this is new. I'm all for deomcratic teams but ultimately someone has to carry the can I think.
I agree with Vince - and I don't think de-layering is the answer either unless whoever is setting the standards for the culture changes their behaviours! In my experience, simply shuffling the chess pieces doesn't cut it!
Whether it be 'democratising' or 'empowerment' executives and senior managers have to recognise they have 'talent' not just human resource bodies available withing their organisations and team, they should harness that talent by sharing the challenges they perceive that their organisations face and agree objectieve /goals that the 'talent', which they probably employed, and allowing them to get things done internally whilst they the senior mangers fulfil their roles by reviewing the strategic options and dealing with the 'external' influences.
Hasn't the global crisis evolved through de-regulation and a lack of supervision combined with hubris and a drive for ever increasing "business buzzes" and financial returns?
I've never seen a police force or military operation (in the UK or the USA) fold due to heirarchical structures and a lack of employee engagement.
I'm not suggesting engagement of staff in these organisations doesn't happen as I can testify first hand that it does but there are clear lines of responsibity and accountability and a healthy level of governance and control not the opposite!
yep, I agree with Vince and Shona, it's useless.
I think there is some truth in the article and that in many organisations the role of leaders and managers has changed significantly. The most skillful leaders recruit and develop talented people and then point them in the right the direction and empower teams to achieve the goal. Expectations from the leadership roles is changing; people want to feel motivated and have room in their job to take responsibility and be creative. There are still too many managers who believe they have all the answers and it is their role to determine how people do everything. Having too many managers is stifling for everyone. At the risk of being controversial development in organisatons is becoming more successful when approached from the front line and not top down.
I think one of the issues that is being raised is the difference between delegation and abdication. Empowerment does not mean managers abdicate all of their responsibilities otherwise it won't work.
To empower staff properly you have to ensure they are well trained, understand the goals and the limit of their authority. Some form of reporting and monitoring is still required which should enable the manager to retain acountability.
I recall that on empowering members of my team to carry oput tasks I knew they would (and they did) do it differently to me. Whilst it is hard to let go you have to let them try knowing that they can always ask for help/guidance if they want to.
Whilst it may not have been the way I would have gone about it they did achieve the required result. They also learned and grew from the experience.
Sometimes you just have to be brave enough to say that we don't have to keep on doing it this way because we have always done it this way or because that is the way I would do it. It isn't always the only or best way!