The Drucker paradox
After my brief comments about Peter Drucker, Laurence Haughton and I swapped a few emails wondering why Drucker’s ideas are so widely quoted and so rarely practiced. Laurence says:
I’m curious. Is it we can’t or won’t? Are we lazy or simply not disturbed by believing something but not living up to it in any way?
Are we simply confused by all the management bs in the world (look at the crap Trump is flinging)? After all the management sciences are only 100 years old. Think of the nonsense in medicine during its first century as a science. (Drucker made this point once).
I think this is a bad thing. Can you imagine what would happen if an engineer ignored the fundamental lessons of his or her education as he designed a new product?
Forget whether Drucker was right, maybe our ease at believing something but never practicing it keeps us in the dark. Certainly dysfunctional behavior is widespread. Maybe the reason is we don’t do anything but yack about it.
I wonder the same thing. I think that perhaps part of the issue is simple perception. Drucker wrote so much that we’re bound to find more violations than compliance when examining the actions and behavior of any single manager. Some are "more better" than others, but none are quite perfect. That said, it really does seem like we managers do a lot more talking than doing. Thoughts?
Related Stories
POSTED IN: management
11 opinions for The Drucker paradox
David Gammel
Nov 18, 2005 at 7:48 am
I’ve always viewed management as an art rather than a science. There are principles you can learn but the application of them will always be unique and require insight into the current context. That kind of insight strikes me as much more artistic or empathetic in nature than relying upon analysis of purely quantifiable data.
You can believe in great art and understand why it is great but making great art yourself is a lot harder to do.
laurence haughton
Nov 18, 2005 at 10:05 am
I agree, it is very hard to practice the art of management.
An artist once advised me “you need to know the rules (and be able to execute according to the rules) before you break them.” He taught jazz improv to trained musicians.
Drucker wrote a “score” for managers. IMHO, leaders should learn to play it before they start with variations to a theme.
Zach Wilson
Nov 18, 2005 at 11:59 am
I am going to have to agree too. Management is a tough bag. People are either born leaders or born follows. Leading is an art, just like a composer or painter, you are born with that ability and just have to have the right trigger to take full advantage of it.
Dan
Nov 18, 2005 at 1:49 pm
I think I find this true with many intellectuals. They tend to prefer thinking about things rather than doing them given the choice. Whether this is good or bad.. who’s to say really. I suppose there’s a place for theory and one for practice. Was a good post about something similar on http://www.businessweekasia.com/smallbiz/content/sep2001/sb2001097_283.htm
Diane
Nov 18, 2005 at 7:28 pm
I fear for management in this country. It seems that far from honoring vision and enterprise, there’s a trend of promoting obedient yes-people and supressing any dissent.
George Washington purposely selected Jefferson and Hamilton for his Cabinet, polar opposites in their political philosophy. They fought bitterly, but in listening to the debate, Washington had access to all the information he needed to make a good decision.
Chris Bailey
Nov 19, 2005 at 9:38 am
Zach, I’m going to have to disagree with your argument that you’re either a born leader or a born follower. This sounds too much like leader as patriarch, leader as the one who knows the path, leader as the one with all the answers.
This is a different discussion than what it is to manage. You can be a terrible leader, but a great manager. It can also go the other way. But is management really an art? Does management have room for the creative, the intuitive, the spiritualist?
Right now, I see management stuck with its dependency on stability, compliance, and fixed vision of the future. There really is no place for the jazz model of loose and organic development. Can you imagine a senior manager at a F100 company saying, “Hey, let’s get together, start this project, and see where it goes?” Heck no. They’re too afraid of their own accountability and need for controlling the process.
Perhaps the true problem lies in the fact that most of us equate faulty decision-making (which is the crux of all management activity) with elements of intuition, imagination, and those other things that are just not rational/logical.
Jamie Fristrom
Nov 19, 2005 at 11:40 pm
To quote Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction, “Example?”
What are some standard Druckerisms that aren’t being practiced?
I tend to see a lot of them practiced: employees treated as volunteers; keeping records of where time goes and what decisions are made; clear communication ( and since Drucker doesn’t seem to care whether you’re soft or hard, a lot of management I’d consider ‘bad’ is still Drucker-compliant, because at least it’s clear); true leadership as opposed to “drift” (not sure if this is good, either, *Wisdom of Crowds* and all that)…
Jamie Fristrom
Nov 20, 2005 at 10:29 am
To quote Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction, “Example?”
What are some standard Druckerisms that aren’t being practiced?
I tend to see a lot of them practiced: employees treated as volunteers; keeping records of where time goes and what decisions are made; clear communication ( and since Drucker doesn’t seem to care whether you’re soft or hard, a lot of management I’d consider ‘bad’ is still Drucker-compliant, because at least it’s clear); true leadership as opposed to “drift” (not sure if this is good, either, *Wisdom of Crowds* and all that)…
laurence haughton
Nov 20, 2005 at 12:57 pm
He’s the first example, “Profit is not the explanation, cause, or rationale of business behavior and business decisions…” Drucker wrote. “but rather the test of their validity.” He also said in that same vein, “The purpose of a business is to create a customer.”
Here’s a second example. Drucker criticized organizations who issued directives to “cut 5 or 10 percent from budgets across the board.” He said, “This is ineffectual at best and at worst, apt to cripple the important, result-producing efforts that usually get less money that they need to begin with.” Yet, when have you seen a company (under pressure) cut costs using Drucker’s clear distinctions between efficiency and effectiveness instead of the across-the-board cop out?
Now how about some examples from your side. What specifcally did Drucker write about treating employees as volunteers and what specific examples do you have? What did Drucker say about tracking time and what managers keep track of their time as Drucker suggested?
My point was that Drucker is the “most quoted and least heeded” advice giver in the managment sciences. (http://www.christiansarkar.com/2005/11/laurence_haughton_on_peter_dru.htm)
Curious Cat Management Improvement
Nov 23, 2005 at 7:30 am
Laurence Haughton on Peter Drucker
It is frustrating, but I wouldn’t draw that conclusion.
As readers of this blog know, I am a big fan of W. Edwards Deming’s ideas. Many of his ideas are ignored. However, even so, his influence on management in America, and worldwide, has been sig…
OSEMEN
Jul 22, 2006 at 6:47 pm
I REALLY APPREACIATE YOU PEOPLE EFFORT, KEEP IT UP. OSEMEN FROM NIGERIA