Drucker concerns with why, what, who and when more than how. That is why he says that there is no one single solution is the right solution or one single management organization is the right organization. Management is a liberal art discipline where one has to understand what he is doing and why he is doing so in every decision making situation.
David Wong How about "what if" - is it a focus at Drucker difference? It seems that the "what if" is quite a good reality test during decision making process and business negotiation/ mediation.
Drucker’s teaching is value based. Every decision and every thought of a manager is driven by the values he holds (knowingly or unknowingly). The value system should include integrity, human dignity, responsibility and pursue of Excellency. Thus there is no need of a separate subject on Business Ethics. His/her very act should be guided by the value system. For a corporation, in the same logical argument, should integrate social wellness and social concern into its business strategies.
That is why Drucker formulated the Corporate Social Integration in the early 60s. Michael Porter wrote his famous SCI in 2006. and award winning article on CSI in 2006
Jeffrey Li Marketing 3.0 (author: Philip Kotler) mentioned this point as well.
David Wong The problem is that everyone has his/her own core value/ belief system as influenced by his/her brought up.....so the value which the manager perceives as good may not be well to the community.... I have stuck by this confusion for awhile until I come to learn of the core value in bible - the Love, Righteousness, Justice, which I then turn into Caring Integrity Fairness ("CIF") as a more "business sounded"core value for promotion within an international brand Group that I served previously.
Peter Liu You are very right that everyone has his/her combinations of values. Each has a number of strong and weak values which may change with circumstances. You are very mature to have find your own values and put them in-line with Biblical values and make them explicit.
A business entity, or any organization lives by a set of explicit or implicit values. These values guide their decisions that gradually becomes their culture.
A good example to illustrate value-based teaching is years ago the way we learn Chinese. We study the Four Books and so on and behind the explicit writings were the values.
Drucker Differences No. 4
Drucker perceives a dynamic world that changes. Time must be factored into every aspect of decision and action. Therefore one has to learn and improve in order not to be wasted (victim of law of thermal dynamics.) One cannot predict the future but what is happening is not agnostically random. Therefore one must make the future today diligently.
One may say this is Drucker's weakness in terms of research. Peter Senge, Jim Collins, students (directly or indirectly) research by studying thousands of companies and interviewed even more business leaders to come up with some conclusions. By the time they get the books out (3 years data gathering and analysis, 2 years writing and publish) the facts changed and the foundation of the conclusions shaken. We all laugh at this. Schools and universities are now trapped y this sad cycle.
Drucker, on the other hand looked forward. He asked questions while he observed (not at a small spot-lighted area but relating to the society). With his deep understanding of law, economics, social theories, he was able to say something that are basic and hence lasting. Most of the influential, significant liberal arts theories (economics, political, religion, social behavior works) which have become the fundamentals of modern theories were done like this.
Jeffrey Li totally agree, I go through Peter Senge's and Jim collin's books recently. Both of their statements are very supporting Drucker's ideas, especially Jim Collin's books that show many evidences to support it. That's why Drucker is Gurus' Guru.
David Wong Unfortunately in the academics field, the US research based (ie quantifiable approach) articles/journals mostly rank as "A " journal whilst the UK based (qualitative approach by asking what, why and when questions similar to Drucker NO 1 Difference which I believe is integrated in No 5 - Methodology) journal normally ranks as "B"journal on the list of journals appraisal in the Universities in HK - I suppose the leader at the Universities have to study more on Drucker difference to make the HK Universities a "Good" Difference.
沒有留言:
張貼留言