Volume 17, Number 3 Article by Pradeep Banerjee September, 2005
Back to Basics in Management _ A Critique of the Fabled Management Mantras : By T N Hari and Rupa Mahanty, Response Books, New Delhi, 2003, pp. 207, Price: Rs. 250 (paper). :
Management as an area of research and study has been a late entrant in the realm of academics. There are advantages to this position _ the discipline of management has gained from the infusion of a number of disciplines with longer histories of scholastic involvement, so that it can, as it were, stand on the shoulders of giants. These inputs have been of relevance to both the academic study of the subject, and to the practice of management at the nuts and bolts level. Adam Smith's study of a pin-manufacturing unit and his subsequent writings on the benefits accruing from specialisation of labour have been one of the cornerstones of economic theory, and could also be viewed as a management technique put into practice a few centuries Hartog and Dickson hold that, while leadership research has been strongly influenced by `North American values', the assumptions underlying these values are not necessarily shared in other cultures. Hence the need for greater understanding so that leaders can act in a culturally sensitive manner. The GLOBE project2 and Hofstede's work3 are among the most widely recognised, as well as criticised. The authors suggest additional orientations, such as assumptions about human nature (Are people generally neutral, good, or evil?) and central orientation (the perceived nature of relationship with the outside world: whether of subjugation, harmony, or of dominance). Eagly and Carli focus on gender-based expectations of a leader. They discuss the validity of four general types of explanations regarding women's lesser occupancy of high-level leadership positions: women's lesser investments in human capital; leadership style differences between men and women; the evolutionary psychology argument of men as naturally dominant; and prejudice and discrimination against women. They find that the existing literature and meta-analyses fail to provide support to the first three arguments, going on to argue that female leaders need to demonstrate exceptional competence to be seen as equal in ability to men and must also avoid threatening others with their competence and lack of warmth.
Ethics, which has not received adequate attention from leadership researchers in the past, is only now being taken into consideration in the wake of the recently reported high-publicity ethical crises in organisations worldwide. J B Ciulla weaves perspectives from history and philosophy to emphasise the importance of ethics in leadership. Traditional leadership researchers have neglected the complexities or practical dimensions of ethical leadership. Ciulla addresses this, as well as the relationships between ethics and effectiveness, ethics and altruism, and the current theories of transformational and charismatic leadership. Finally, Bennis gives us perspectives of emerging leadership in a world increasingly torn apart by distrust and suspicion, amidst the ugly realities of international terrorism and the influence of the information and communication technologies. He draws our attention to the challenges leaders face in the current context, particularly in times of crisis, and advocates a return to a more heroic, more inspirational definition than had been the fashion for decades. The context marked by digital technology and globalisation calls for leadership that is, above all, collaborative. Secondly, with the increasing pace of change, leaders need to constantly reassess their positions and to create a culture of candour.
All in all, the book will be of use to both the general reader and serious academics interested in the phenomena of earlier. The reason that it was not is due to the fact that commerce and production have gained rapid momentum the world over only in the twentieth century. Today, the academic discipline of management is called upon to service a wider domain; research outputs have real world relevance; the canvas has grown and so has the clamour for clarity.
As the discipline evolved, the area of management science has attracted researchers who have worked to contribute to the content of this discipline. The utility of these inputs is best seen when they have been taken up for practice and this is where the gaps between theory and practice have surfaced. In contrast to qualitatively superior research outputs that have enhanced corporate performance when implemented, there have been outputs that, while raising the expectations of the user, have failed to deliver on the front. Some theories report on success stories elsewhere under conditions that may not be replicable, while others are essentially `old wine in new bottles'. On instance cited by the authors is the concept of `Core Competence', which, while being a valid recipe, is essentially no different from the previously used concept of SWOT analysis, or for that matter the idea of `Core Capabilities', proposed decades earlier by Igor Ansoff. The word `critique' in the title of this book makes its intentions quite clear. It sounds a note of caution to the practitioner, who may be in the process of working out an implementation schedule of the latest of these mantras, to filter the reports and recommendations of consultants.
Management theorists over the years have been prolific. Hari and Mohanty choose ten among the many mantras that could be candidates for evaluation. These include Total Quality Management, Re-engineering, Economic Value Addition, Strategic Planning, Learning Organisations, Human Capital, Globalisation, Business Cycles, Decentralisation and, finally, Empowerment. The approach has been to draw the contours of each of these theories, describe the developments and the practitioner reviews of these systems, and arrive at a wrapping up of the theory under discussion. This approach has worked well with tools such as Re-engineering, where the potential for application in a work situation can be evaluated, but has been hard to adopt when a concept like Globalisation is under discussion.
Knitting together this series of critiques, the authors offer a holistic view in the final chapter. The intent here is to emphasise the fact that while some theories and tools do merit individual attention, none of them is a panacea for all the ills of an organisation. They suggest, accordingly, that managers read about them, distil their essence, and only then proceed to relate these theories and tools to an organisation, always keeping in mind the uniqueness of that organisation. What is really needed is an integrated approach to management. Drawing lessons from other established fields of knowledge, the authors observe that `Management, more than physics, calls for a unified theory'. This, however, appears an impossible demand. As Griseri1 points out, `there is a personal element in the conception of management which makes it partially resistant to the open challenge and debate which characterises unified subject disciplines. Without being too misleading, one can say that the definition of the subject area has an element of, if not subjectivity, then at least individuality'. The experiential learning of a practising manager is therefore an important component of the discipline.
The book does not achieve the rigour necessary for an academic audience. Terms like `basics in management' and `first principles' are imprecise and merit definition, especially as the former serves as a fulcrum to the text. However, the boxes of `basics in management' provided in the book make it useful to a practising manager as a handbook, and provide a much needed note of caution in the present scenario where the manager is exposed to so much hype.
References
1. Griseri, Paul, Management Knowledge _ A Critical View, Palgrave, 2002, pp. 15-16. Italics are the author's.
Reprint No