7 ms·
To very large degree Boss/Management role is to support (indirect control) allocation of human capital resources to tasks in relation to objectives with minimal
by neatze 6y ago
To very large degree Boss/Management role is to support (indirect control) allocation of human capital resources to tasks in relation to objectives with minimal inefficiencies such as; conflicts, overlap in tasks, miscoordination.
I would argue there is virtually no justification to manage people by means direct control, virtually for any team/group sizes.
- pjc50 6y agoThat's the organizational role. The interpersonal, social one is often a lot more primitive and has nothing to do with capital or resources.
- neatze 6y agoSorry, for being so direct, but are we still talking about small business/enterprise organization or family and friends ? > has nothing to do with capital or resources. Is most confusing point for me. In general, if you meant enforcing compliance, I would have different response, but you clearly did not mean that in your original post.
- pjc50 6y agoIn any organisation, although it's more likely to be bad in small ones. I'm talking about the difference between the formal, process-related aspects of management and the social/anthropological/dominance aspects. All the stuff that matters once voices get raised and feelings get high. To tie this back to the original post: why is there information that subordinates have that would potentially improve the business, that they want to give to their seniors, but they don't? It's because that information is uncomfortable. Also, all the stuff in the original article below "Incredible amounts of harassment of any kind". Why do business deals get done at strip clubs in the first place? It's not in the company's interest, it happens because those involved have enough power to use company resources for their own purposes and enjoy all the little displays of dominance involved in such an outing.
- neatze 6y ago> social/anthropological/dominance aspects Are highly subjective when compared to "formal" management functions. > All the stuff that matters once voices get raised and feelings get high. This is clear aspect of conflict resolution, if management process is optimal such situation are rare cases. Undoubtedly, there are cases where you have to change tone to get point across, this only can be rationally justified if all other means fails. > why is there information that subordinates have that would potentially improve the business, that they want to give to their seniors, but they don't? It's because that information is uncomfortable. This is only one of the so many reason why this can happen, in general, learning, negations, feedback, are all uncomfortable processes to a degree. The major factor why there is failures to improve organization process is shared understanding that is bases of communication, in addition to risks, responsibility individual mechanisms. > Why do business deals get done at strip clubs in the first place? There some aspect important aspect of social interaction before business deal similarly as there is dating before marriage. > It's not in the company's interest, it happens because those involved have enough power to use company resources for their own purposes and enjoy all the little displays of dominance involved in such an outing. Such narrow view is simply false.
- thu2111 6y agoThat seems extreme. Managers have to lead and make decisions. If they don't then you rapidly end up with chaos. That's how some firms end up with 10 different languages being used, where no engineer can work on anyone else's codebase because there's no consistency about anything, where progress is minimal because decisions don't get made due to some people disagreeing with each other and having no way to break the deadlock, etc. I think it's become sort of fashionable to claim bosses are always clueless or shouldn't actually try to manage because their employees are always smarter than they are. The "servant manager" idea. That is dead wrong in my experience. Or rather, if the manager has no idea how to do the work their employees are doing and just sits out that part of their role, the team has much bigger problems.
- neatze 6y agoConcept of empowerment within a context of mission command and science of control, arguably, is by far the most complex matter in humans. > Managers have to lead and make decisions. If they don't then you rapidly end up with chaos. That's how ... I thought I made this point clear in terms of inefficiencies example. While it is oversimplification I attempt to exemplify this using spatial navigation analogy. Owners select area and resources. Managers of Managers who make decisions on approach to area and to a degree by what resources. Operational Manager make decision on routes way points a given resources. Workers will make decisions in between way points. With such example: one can argue this should be top down one way hierarchical approach, the old school inefficient approach. (eg. Direct Control) In my perspective, modern approach is to utilize indirect control by establishing conditional triggers (eg. only specifying limitations on areas, approaches, routes, and way points) based on horizontal feedback (top/down or down/up hierarchy) and vertical feedback (side way communication).