What is management?
Most textbook definitions of the art of management (or science, depending on one’s leanings) aren’t particularly edifying. They all somehow seem to miss the essence of what it means to be a manager. Judge for yourself – here are some definitions of management gleaned from online resources:
-
Directing and controlling a group of one or more people or entities for the purpose of coordinating and harmonizing them towards accomplishing a goal. (Source: Wikipedia)
-
The process of getting work done through people (Source: UNR College of Business Administration, attributed to the American Management Association).
Additionally, this article provides an annotated compilation of definitions.
My problem with each of the above definitions – including those in the article – is that they emphasise a superior-subordinate relationship between the manager and the managed. Now, the good managers (that I know) go to great lengths to downplay the “I’m the boss” aspect of the relationship. Yet, the definitions – through their use of words like direct, control, supervise, manipulate, get done etc. – continue to propagate a distorted notion of what it really means to be a manager.
To date, the best definition I’ve seen is tucked away in half a line on page 19 of Scott Berkun’s book, The Art of Project Management. Here it is; a simple and succinct definition that captures the essence of what it means to be a manager:
Managers (are hired to) amplify the value of everyone around them. (Source: Scott Berkun, The Art of Project Managment, O’Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol, 2005 – Page 19)
“That’s it!”, I thought, when I first read it.
What I like about this definition is that it downplays the superior-subordinate aspect of management, which is not that important anyway. Instead it highlights the fact that everyone has something to offer (special skills, talents, whatever), and that a manager’s job is simply to amplify that “something” to best effect. As an aside I should add that, in my opinion, the tired debates on management versus leadership are misplaced, as (good) management encompasses many elements of leadership as well.
I’m interested in your opinion. What do you think – does Scott Berkun’s definition capture the essence of what it means to be a manager? Let me know through your comments.
Soporific speaker stereotypes
Some weeks ago I sat through yet another presentation that had me drifting into dreamland within minutes. To stay awake, I started to put together a list of stereotypical soporific speakers, much in the spirit of a couple of my earlier posts on project mismanagers and meeting time wasters. It was, I confess, the best time I’ve had at a bad presentation in a long time. Without further ado, here’s my list:
Pete Powerpoint: Peter’s presentations are a vehicle to showcase his undeniable virtuosity at Powerpoint. The content? Who cares. The slides are absolutely brilliant.
Freda Funny-font: Freda loves visual aids. Her problem is that she uses unreadable fonts.
Marty Mumbler: Martin has something useful to say, I’m sure. The only problem is I can’t figure out what it is. His presentations invariably consist of an inaudible issuance of intonations that even those in the front row cannot interpret.
Greta Garbled: Greta has mastered the art of the unfocused presentation. She manages to cram a lot of diverse – but not necessarily relevant – material into her talks. It’s quite a challenge to figure out what she’s going on about.
Barry Backside: Barry’s presentations can actually be quite good – if only I could get to see them. His problem is that he refuses to face his audience while speaking, often unwittingly covering his slides, or the whiteboard or whatever visual aid he’s using.
Umberto Unprepared: Umberto likes to wing it, but unfortunately ends up crashing every time. He never prepares for his presentations, and it invariably shows right from his starting stutter to his final fumble.
Oscar Overtime (Thomas Too-much): Oscar is in some ways the extreme opposite of Umberto – he prepares way more material than he has time to deliver. Consequently he ends up going over his allotted time. He’s mastered the art of ignoring frantic signals from meeting moderators and cues from annoyed audiences. He’s prepared all that wonderful material and he’s going to deliver it (all), come what may.
Mike Microphone-Muddler: You’ll hear about half of Mike’s presentation. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to predict which parts of his talk you’ll hear because he keeps drifting in and out of microphone range at random.
No doubt, there are many others I’ve missed in this short list of soporific speakers. I welcome further contributions to the list through your comments.
Many snappy returns
Some weeks ago I played table tennis , or ping-pong as North American residents know it, for the first time in many years. The occasion was brought about by a comprehensive power failure in the building I work in. The UPS held up for a half hour or so, giving our ops mob just enough time to notify users and shutdown servers gracefully. That done, all we could do was to wait for the guys at the power company to do their thing.
Deprive a bunch of IT folks of their computers and they’ll soon start inventing other means of entertainment. Sure enough, within minutes someone suggested improvised table tennis, to be played on the lunch room table with CD cases as racquets and printer toner cartons, lined up end-to-end, serving as a rather wide net. We played several rounds of single-point games, with the loser handing the CD case to the first person on the queue (by this time a large queue had formed since no one had anything better to do).
Whilst engaged in a particular long rally against a worthy opponent from helpdesk, it occurred to me that table tennis rallies are a bit like dealing with clients. Allow me to explain: the aim of the game – table tennis, not consulting (although some practitioners may consider the latter a game as well) – is to lob or smash or return the ball in any way to the other court as snappily as one’s ability permits.
“And what does this have to do with consultants dealing with clients?”, I hear you ask.
Well, consultants are generally engaged to provide a service in return for which they are paid, often by the hour or some multiple thereof. Given that consultants bill by time, it behooves them to respond to all client queries in a timely manner.
If you are a consultant, your clients should never be left wondering about when they might expect a response from you. If there’s any waiting to be done, be sure it’s you who is doing the waiting. Snappy, accurate responses to client queries are of paramount importance. As in the case of table tennis, the ball should as far as possible be in their court, not yours.
Eight to Late 