To be more precise 'Management' is the application of the knowledge gained through scientific research. It is not an art.

We, therefore, see management as a profession rather than a craft. A craftsman applies techniques without questioning the basis of the technique. A professional understands both the technique and its underpinning theory.

Definition of a Theorem: an idea accepted as a demonstrate truth. Theories are developed through the disciplined cycle of postulating a concept, rigorous testing, and only developing the concept into a theory when all the evidence supports the original assumption.

This call to see management as a science based on theory has been repeated by many scholars over the past century.

• The Theories we hold determine what we measure (Einstein)
• There is no prediction without theory (McGregor)
• Theory is a window into the world. Theory leads to prediction. Without prediction experience and examples teach nothing. To copy an example of success without understanding it with the aid of theory, may lead to disaster" (Deming)

The following is a table comparing contrasting theories - where appropriate we identify further reading from the bibliography; authors not mentioned in the bibliography are in italics.

All these theories are interrelated, in fact it is a false proposition that we can seperate them out as we have done on this site. It is written in this way simply to ease explanation.

Furthermore, there is no right or wrong theory. We apply the theory appropriate to the situation. Our call is that the managers is aware of the theories they are using and have sufficient broad based knowledge to allow them to select which suite of theories are appropriate for the circumstance.

The article The Crux of the Challenge develops the above call for our thinking to be based on sound theories

A major focus with alternative thinking is that we should move away from analytical or reductionist thinking - breaking challenges down to its component parts - and pay particular attention to the whole. The term used is holistic thinking where we focus on the interdependences of all the facets of the whole. In this context each underlying principle or theory does not stand on its own but is part of a network of theories that combine to provide a dynamic whole.

On this site we use the holistic framework that has been provided by Edwards Deming. He called it "A System of Profound Knowledge." It contains four elements that combine into an overall system.

• Appreciation of a system
• Knowledge about variation
• Psychology and how we learn
• The theory of knowledge

Each element is expanded below. We would emphasize that the four elements cannot be separated. They interact with each other.

Appreciation for a System

A system is a network of interdependent components that work together to try to accomplish the aim of the system. A system must have an aim. The greater the interdependence between components, the greater will be the need for communication and cooperation between them. An example of a system, well optimised, is a good orchestra. The players are not there to play solos as prima donnas, each trying to catch the ear of the listener. They are there to support each other. Individually, they need not be the best players in the country.

Since the days of Descartes and Newton the whole trend of Western thought has been to break down problems to its parts on the assumption that understanding the parts will provide an appreciation of the whole. We have had a mechanistic view of the world where we have seen the world as giant machine - like a giant clock - with the expectation that with time we will understand the working of this clock. While this approach has brought considerable advances over the past three centuries we are now coming to realise that it is not so much the study of the parts but how the parts interrelate that is going to be the significant development of the future.

This analytical thinking is reflected by the various functions we have in an organisation. We create departments and then set goals for each section, assuming that if each department does well then the whole will prosper. One of the outcomes is poor communication between functions - typically between sales and operations. We spend little to no time studying relationships between functions and the flow of work through the organisation. And when we seek improvement we go down to the lowest common denominator, to the people themselves. Our mindset thinks of improvement in terms of improving the people - through training, demanding greater diligence by use of targets and by encouraging motivation through reward schemes. System thinking is recognising that the real opportunity for improvement lies in the development of the interrelationships between functions and people.

See also a Harehall article on Systems Thinking

An outcome of systems thinking is the recognition that an organisation has a learning ability that is quite separate from the individual. We see the organisation as a living entity that has an intelligence of its own. This concept is further explained in the file Individual vs Organisational Learning

Return to System of Profound Knowledge

Variation

Variation is all around us - everything we measure contains variation. There is variation in all the inputs - people, materials, equipment, methods, environment- they all vary. The outputs are therefore going to vary. If we are to measure and get meaning from these outputs then it is necessary for us to understand variation.

We identify two types of variation. The first is the expected variation present in the normal operation of the system.(Common Cause) The second is when something unexpected is happening within the system. (Special Cause). The need is to be able to differentiate between these two types of variation. With Common Cause we secure improvement through improving the system. With Special Cause we investigate the one event. If we fail to make this distinction there is the very real possibility that our involvement will make things worse.

Another consideration is that if we have high variation in several of our systems we leave ourselves open to complexity and disorder. To gain control and establish stability the aim would be to reduce variation.

Walter Shewart in the 1930s was the principle thinker who opened up our understanding of variation. He developed the simple and extremely use tool "The Control Chart" and initiated the whole science of Statistical Process Control.

See also a Harehall article on Variation and Disorder

Return to the System of Profound Knowledge

Psychology

Psychology helps us to understand people, interaction between people and circumstances, interaction between customer and supplier, interaction between teacher and pupil, interaction between manager and his/her people and any system of management.

People are different from one another. We learn in different ways and at different speeds. There are the positive intrinsic sources of motivation and extrinsic sources of motivation. One is born with a natural inclination to learn. Learning is a source of innovation. One inherits the right to enjoy work. Good management helps us to nurture and preserve these positive innate attributes of people.

We are motivated both intrinsically, through pride for example,and extrinsically for some external reward. However the fundamental driver for an individual is their intrinsic motivation. It is what the individual self can rationalise intrinsically as important and provides meaning. If the individual is consistently driven by external factors, and the priorities of others, self esteem becomes undermined and motivation as a whole is severely damaged.

The other basic consideration is that we are all different. Some are motivated by tasks, others by relationships, other by the desire to influence. We also learn differently, some through pictorial representations such as graphs, other through the written word others through verbal communication.The important consideration is that no one way is better than the other. Grading is inappropriate.

And then there is interrelationships, how we work together and how we respond to each other.

Obviously much has been written on the subject of psychology and motivation. Some examples are:

• The Human Side of Enterprise by Douglas McGregor. This is the seminal book where McGregor differentiates between X theory management - based on the assumptions that people are naturally lazy; and Y theory management that recognises that people like work and will take responsibility. Companies that think their people lazy develop a management style that is described as "Direct and Control." Organisations that see the intrinsic motivation of their staff focus on "Integration and Self Control." Obviously those companies that recognise intrinsic motivation are much more successful in capturing staff commitment and motivation.
• Why Did I do That? by George New and David Cormack. The book develops the theme that our motives, which lie in the inner realms of our conscious mind, determine our observed behavior. And that while we are all motivated differently we can approximate three main motivations. Achievement or task orientation, Affiliation or relationships and Power or the desire to be influential. As we can identify motivations of individuals, it both increases our understanding of relationships and it allows us to recognise jobs at which the individual will be successful. Again there are no grades.
• Team Roles at Work by Meridth Belbin. A similar theme to the above analysis of motivation but this time in the context of our relationships or "roles" within teams. We all bring different "roles" to a team situation - again no grading. To have effective teams the argument is that we should have a balance of the "roles" of team members.
• Now Discover your Strengths by Marcus Buckingham and Donald Clifton. The basic argument of the book is that it is much more fruitful to develop our strengths rather than addressing our weaknesses.
• Human Motivation by Yoshio Kondo. A consideration of the needs of the individual. Kondo views our needs three interrelated areas - the need for social interaction, The need for work and physical activity and the need to be able to think and be creative.
• Punished by Rewards by Alfie Kohn. A very important book as there is a widespread misconception that we can motivate through focusing on extrinsic rewards. Kohn, with the support of extensive research, argues that the use of rewards is a manipulative and controlling technique that backfires. See short article on his work

Return to System of Profound Knowledge

How we learn

We are beginning to open up consideration of just how we learn. Dr Phil Sadler of The Howard Smithsonian Centre, USA, conducted research into teaching methods and found that the traditional teaching was in fact reducing rather than increasing knowledge. From a young age we develop perceptions of how the world works, and we can be wrong. But these perceptions are strongly held and when we hear information that contradicts our perceptions it simple adds to our confusion. Traditional teaching rarely has the space to tackle basic misconceptions. And in higher education the tendencies is to provide more and more information with assessment being in context of the regurgitation of the information - at the expense of basic knowledge.

Noel Barker develops similar thinking when he talks about our paradigms, and our need to identify and challenge our paradigms. Edward de Bono likewise in his many lateral thinking books talks about the need to initiate provocative exercises to create a shift in our thinking.

The work of Reuven Feuerstein is of crucial importance in this field. He has developed his theories and methods with children who have learning difficulties in Israel. While his focus remains with these children his approach is now being applied across all spectrums of society. The starting point is his theory of intelligence - All animals have patterns of thought in their brains, and what makes humans unique is the adaptability of their minds or thinking patterns. Education should be about the development of this adaptability. As we cannot predict the knowledge that will be required in 20 years the focus of education should move away from pouring information into students and onto developing their ability to learn. The web site to visit is that of The International Centre for the Enhancement of Learning Potential www.icepl.org

And then we have the learning of the organisation itself. As we have stated above the organisation is seen to have an intelligence, through its various structures and networks, and therefore has a learning capability.

Return to System of Profound Knowledge

The Theory of knowledge

This whole file opens with the recognition that our development should be founded on sound theories.

"My experiences have convinced me beyond a shadow of doubt that the effectiveness of training can increase dramatically if, above all, we help participants to examine and reappraise their conceptual worlds, and thus make them more receptive to alternatives" (Klas Mellander|)

Management in any form is prediction. We take a course of action with a prediction of the outcomes. Rational prediction requires theory and builds knowledge through systematic revision and extension of theory based on comparison of prediction with observation.(Deming)

Improvement comes from knowledge. Knowledge comes form systematic testing of theories (Deming)

We place great emphasis on this aspect of sound theories to guard against what is commonly called "Flavour of the Month." There are many so called "new" initiatives that are based on our traditional concepts. They change little. If we want real change then it is the underlying theories that need to be upgraded.

The classic example is ISO 9000. It is a systems method. If applied in a systems context then there is consideration of the flow of work and the continual improvement of the systems. From the basis of systems thinking the standard can be beneficial. If however it is applied in a hierarchical "command and control" context then compliance, auditing and corrective actions become the dominant issues. In these circumstances the standard changes little and becomes a bureaucratic burden.

As mentioned above this argument is expanded in a Harehall article The Crux of the Challenge. A further article compares traditional and modern concepts or theories.

Return to System of Profound Knowledge

home