In the first part of this series, we looked at the evolution of the managerial role, starting in the 1910s, and its apparent failure at the dawn of the Internet era. In the second part, we looked at how the idea of charismatic leadership rose in response to the apparent failure of managerial models to cope with new realities, but how that construct failed to actually fix things. It created instead a sort of leadership theater designed to manage Wall Street perceptions, rather than the company.
Failures in leadership were blamed on managerial incompetence. Middle managers, fighting fires out of sight, became convenient scapegoats.
Why? Because they were exposed to the downside of risks without being given the ability to manage those risks or participate significantly in the upside.
We wrapped up last time by noting that the leadership theater is no longer sustainable because of the deluge of information that must be processed to steer a company. Much of that information is starting to flow upward to the C-suite, since managers aren't empowered to handle it. The Management By Exception pipes are about to burst. Read More
Failures in leadership were blamed on managerial incompetence. Middle managers, fighting fires out of sight, became convenient scapegoats.
Why? Because they were exposed to the downside of risks without being given the ability to manage those risks or participate significantly in the upside.
We wrapped up last time by noting that the leadership theater is no longer sustainable because of the deluge of information that must be processed to steer a company. Much of that information is starting to flow upward to the C-suite, since managers aren't empowered to handle it. The Management By Exception pipes are about to burst. Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment