>> MIM Speaks
IDENTIFYING OUR MANAGEMENR GURUS.
JULY 30, 1995 -
SUNDAY STAR
THERE was a time when businesses in the West were given a run
for their money by the Japanese. Chief executive officers,
business schools and management experts began to think of ways
and means to face this challenge.
Japanese methods and practices were studied and applied. In
most cases these ended up with ridiculous results. Imagine
workers on the factory floor in Dallas getting out to exercise
every 10 minutes or so, which is a common sight at most
Japanese-run factories.
They later created their own versions. These led to a
mushrooming of new ideas and theories on almost everything
connected with management.
Thus was born the cult of management gurus in the West.
Business schools, universities and corporations began to
recruit them. Students were easily drawn to them. The process
also spawned a great number of new books on their theories and
ideas.
On top of this, governments all over the world began to employ
them in a big way. Catchy titles like In Search of Excellence,
Dealing with Chaos, Age of Paradox, Swim with the Sharks,
Reinventing the Government and Re-engineering the Corporation
and, most recently, Transformation, became the new management
buzzwords.
In Malaysia, we were also quick to get into the act. But it
must be mentioned that the process was helped by the Malaysia
Incorporated exercise that became policy in 1983.
Management luminaries like Peter Drucker, Tom Peters, Edward
deBono, Toffler and Naisbitt were the crowd-pullers at
seminars and workshops.
Even the Government joined in. Foreign consultants were hired
to advise the Government on many of its long-term planning.
The civil service took up reinventing very seriously. It
recommended as and atoryreading David Osborne and Ted
Gaebler's Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial
Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector (1992) to officers
about to be promoted.
Most recently, the book Re-engineering the Corporation by
Michael Hammer and James K. Champy (1993) was added to the
list of required reading. But as rightly observed by the
Economist in one of its recent issues, these developments that
have taken place worldwide have come with a very heavy price
tag indeed.
What is not realised, according to the Economist is that some
of the fashionable ideas - downsizing, TQM and
re-engineering may be not just awkward partners but mutually
contradictory.
Downsizing supposes that workers are expendable, and TQM that
they are an invaluable resource. Re-engineering depends on
ripping up the organisation and starting again, while TQM is a
doctrine of continuous incremental improvement.
There is no better example than the experience of Perwira
Affin Bank which carried out a recent reorganisation of its
operations. The move was bitterly opposed by the general
employees. Here was a case of re-engineering that has not
worked. Michael Hammer himself admitted in a new book that he
co authored entitled The Re-engineering Revolution that
re-englneering could not succeed if it were not practised
correctly.
He was quoted as saying that "the failure is caused by people
who do not know what they are doing and who do not pursue
Re-engineering in the right way."
The above is not the only case that has come to light. The
most cited example has been the one connected with the bookby
Tom Peters and Bob Waterman called In Search Of ExceUence
which detail the successes of over 70 American companies.
The tragedy is that so few of thesecompanies have survived
today. This has given proof to the observation that not all
theories can hold water.
We are also reminded that these gurus and their tbeories are
only true for that particular time and subject, and are not
suitable for all times
Taken away from their original envirenment their imperfections
would become visible and their inapplicability would begin to
Appear.-In other words before the idea could take shape, it
must surely have been tried out or observed as in tha~se of
the book mentioned.
Once published, the idea began to lose of its brilliance. This
has be a greatest problem with some bf the theories put
forward by these management gurus that have come out of the
West. To keep up with the development, they had to continue to
keep on writing and revising their works. Or else they would
create a new theory to replace the old one. For instance,
Peter Drucker Torn Peters, John Naisbitt and even Charies
Handy are among those that tolk up writing and more writing to
be popular. In fact, they are actually following what the
writer Charles Land had stated as the basic law of human
nature, which is GROW OR DIE.
It becomes.clear that if we would like to progress further we
would have to rely ort our own theories. The need has become
urgent, seeing flat we would soon be entering the new century
and we have already been given an agenda by the Government on
the way to get to Vision 2020. 1t
The experiences fff our historyy couldbenefit us if only we
could flesh out the contribution by individuals and groups
over the years in terms of their management ideas and
theories.
The time has come for the Government and business to seriously
think about identifying Malaysians who can be recognised as
our very own management gurus.
This should not be regarded as another award of state or
something to duplicate existing awards Neither should it
become the equiv alent of the Nobel Prize, the Mag saysay
Award or even the Tun Abdul Kazal Awaru needs to be worked
out.
The following conditions will have to be met:
HE or she must have the qualities of a guru, be it in the
Western or Eastern traditions.
THERE must be a body of original literature.
THE idea or theory must have been tried; applied or satisfy
national or international standards.
MUST pass the test of time.
MUST be recognised beyone the borders.
THE pershn need not be a living person;:te or she could
be-recognised posthumously.
The ideal institution to begin such work on behalf of the
Government should be the Malaysian Insti tute of Management.
To start witb a special team could be convene to suggest a
list of potential people This list can then be refined by rei
erence to criteria also to be set i the initial stages.
A number of areas could be looked into as possible source from
which names could be found including the Red Book for Rural
Development, the National Opera tions Room, the rukun negara
the New Economic Policy and the national car. We need only to
match such a eas with a Malaysian who has contributed
significantly to it. For instance, we could link the rural
development programmes in Malaysia to the late Tun Abdul
Razak. His ideas and practices associated with the Red Book
and the National rations Room have become mosels for other
developing country. Others that can be included a pioneers of
the various ideas in management sense would includ The Sri
Ghazalie Shafie with the Rukunegara, Tan Sri B.C. Sekhx with
rubber, Tan Sri Augustin Ong with palm oil, Royal Aziz with
rural economic even Tun Daim Zainuddin will development
economics.
These people in their own right should all be recognised as
management gurus.
|