The Man Behind the Curtain

Frederick Winslow Taylor (March 20, 1856–March 21, 1915), widely known as F. W. Taylor, was an is regarded as the father of scientific management and was one of the first management consultants. (Wikkipedia)  He felt that it is only through enforced standardization of methods, enforced adoption of the best implements and working conditions, and enforced cooperation that this faster work can be assured. And the duty of enforcing the adoption of standards and enforcing this cooperation rests with management alone.

He said “Hardly a competent workman can be found who does not devote a considerable amount of time to studying just how slowly he can work and still convince his employer that he is going at a good pace.” 

Taylor’s theories led to labour unrest and eventually was outlawed by the US federal government in order to prevent what they feared as an occupational Civil War.

The sad thing is, that this hundred-year-old theory is still being embraced, and in fact worshiped, by the current business community. Rather than becoming and means to an end, the system has become an end unto itself. More effort is currently being expended on systems analysis, and system improvement that is being spent on research and development.

Taylor's methods were to promote improvement in an early 20th century manufacturing process. Many parts of this process were labour-intensive and dependent on low skilled workers. This is no longer true today. The companies that we look at as up-and-coming are typically based on new ideas rather than improving a current product. For example: Google, iPod, Facebook, twitter and so on.

Companies that treat highly skilled employees as candidates for Taylor's methods have done so far as to decrease the cost of production to the detriment of the product. An example of this is outsourcing.  Dell computers outsourced their customer service to India. The client backlash was such that they had to repatriate and retool in North America based helpdesk

.

This does not mean that systemization in itself is bad or should not be a desired company goal, rather, you ask that it should not be the only company goal. Product research and development, intelligent and creative marketing, and a motivated and loyal employee team will produce higher levels of productivity, and a better end product than micromanaging.

Taylor is quoted as saying: “In the past the man has been first; in the future the system must be first...”  When people are placed first, client and worker satisfaction, increase, when the system is given priority, simple cost savings may appear, but in reality those savings are erased and surpassed by increased healthcare costs, training costs, hiring, and other HR costs.

 
Rather than manipulating the levers of productivity from behind the curtain of business school best practices, forward thinking, entrepreneurial, management seeks to understand the big picture on all levels. Business no longer operates in a social political vacuum. Corporate values must meet global objectives and planning must go beyond the next two quarters. The 21st century business looks to the long run.

Taylorism belongs to the 19th century. Micromanagement and short term business planning belong to the 20th century. It's time for us to move on.

Metrics on the Rocks

I am doing a research degree on German anti-Semitism and just finished reading an essay on the compliance of the German people to increasingly macabre laws and censures. They did this in order to maintain their unique membership and familial connection to a socio-political safe house. The essay outlined the cost of fitting in.  The current business management style is becoming similarly bizarre

This brings to mind the MBA mantra of management: IF YOU CAN'T MEASURE YOU CAN'T MANAGE IT!

The theory is that through comparing other organizations or other individuals performance to a baseline of acceptable metrics, one's position in the business world social economic grid is measurable. Like an ancient Mariner's method of dead reckoning, one's position on earth is only relative to observable known landmarks on land and then extrapolated using time and distance to get a fix. When there are no other means for navigation, this is what upon which one must rely.

Once the charts (maps) got better, the timepieces got better and the sextant was invented navigation became much more reliable. The modern invention of Loran C [long-range radio trends location] and digitized charts became popular and available, the need for a basic understanding of time and space became unnecessary and with the introduction of affordability of GPS, the sextant parallel rules and chart were subjected to the museum.

So it is with business intelligence. The dead reckoning of one's past performance and achievable goals have been replaced by the reliance on industry metrics gathered and summarized by non-interested third parties were once position is measured by industry norms and performance-based computer extrapolation models.

So where am I going with this? Is this not progress?  What is the point?

If the financial/strategic planning function has become so reliant on the short-term gains promised by prepackaged performance metric-based business intelligence models, they will not question their navigation tool even though they hear the breakers beating on the shore while their Business Intelligence software screams that they are in deep water and are in no danger of grounding. The ship's crew will follow the navigators prescribed directions to steer the ship on the Mad skipper's course.

Around the "navigation station we hear: "We've had a 20% growth for the last two years and we are a 'motivated startup' with a 'strategic plan' that is a 'no-brainer' for the venture capitalist. Therefore our sales forecast this year should be 60% growth! We will be lowering expenses, minimizing our investment and maximizing our tangible assets which puts us in the upper right quadrant of entrepreneurial high-risk leverage the venture capital success module."

Here is truth. Who are your clients? Are you giving them more than they want or what they bargained for? Are your employees excited by their personal contribution to the enterprise for which they work? If the answers to these questions are unclear it's time to break out the sounding line, the binoculars, and start listening for surf or foghorn.

The verdict is a reality check.  Does the GPS identify the shoals and reefs or does it provide a beautiful multi-media presentation which proves that the Titanic's course in the North Atlantic is an efficient course marketed as a short excursion to obtain special ice for the cocktails?