making knowledge workers more productive insights from the works of peter f. drucker

Making Knowledge Workers More Productive: Insights from the Works of Peter F. Drucker PEX Network Article Compilation

Making Knowledge Workers More Productive: Insights from the Works of Peter F. Drucker

1 | P a g e

www.pexnetwork.com www.pexweek.com

INTRODUCTION

"Making knowledge workers productive requires changes in attitude, not only on the part of the individual knowledge worker, but on the

part of the whole organization." – Peter F. Drucker

Companies have a vested interest in increasing the productivity of their workforce. Increased productivity means the ability to do more without increasing headcounts. But it means something more––much more. Knowledge workers put knowledge to work. Knowledge workers can be doctors, robotic repair people, sales managers, maintenance managers, quality specialists, market researchers, graphic artists and the like. The list is virtually endless given the composition of today's knowledge-based workforce. Let's be clear here. Information is not knowledge. Only if information is put to work can it become KNOWLEDGE. Perhaps Oscar Hammerstein said it best: “A Bell is not a bell 'till you ring it, a song is not a song,' till you sing it.” Information must be applied to specific work and performance for it to be classified as knowledge. It must be mentioned––indeed, emphasized––that only human beings with their brains and/or the skill of their hands can convert information into knowledge. Wealth creation results if knowledge workers do the right things and do them right. In other words, the right knowledge properly applied by human beings creates wealth. Translated, this means that knowledge workers (which are completely different than manual workers) must be made more productive. Only by making knowledge workers more productive––as you'll learn from the selected articles––can inflation be controlled and wealth created for organizations and society. Peter F. Drucker taught us much about managing knowledge work. He provided us with a framework for being able to think through thoughtfully and thoroughly what must be done and how to do it. In this PEX Network article compilation, colleagues, and students of Peter F. Drucker, share their thoughts on what the “master of management” thought about the keys to making knowledge workers more productive.

A special thank you to Dr. Robert W. Swaim and Dr. William F. Cohen for their contributions to this report.

http://www.pexnetwork.com/

http://www.pexweek.com/

http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/contributors/1774-robert-w-swaim/

http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/contributors/64-william-cohen-ph-d/


2 | P a g e


CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 0

A New Emphasis on Productivity Improvement ......................................................................... 4

Getting Down to Busy-ness: Knowledge Workers Are Less Productive than Ever .................... 11

Abandoning the Obsolete and Unproductive: A Difficult but Necessary Task .......................... 30

The Secret to Achieving More with Less - The Pareto Principle in Action ................................ 34

The Demotivation Trap and What You Can Do About It ........................................................... 42

5 Global “Certainties” You Can’t Afford to Ignore .................................................................... 52

About the Authors .................................................................................................................... 56

Learn more about Productivity Enhancement Through Lean Six Sigma & BPM ....................... 57




3 | P a g e


“The most valuable assets of the 20th-century company were its production equipment. The most

valuable asset of a 21st-century institution, whether business or non-business, will be its knowledge

workers and their productivity.”

- Peter F. Drucker




4 | P a g e


A NEW EMPHASIS ON PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT

From the Editorial Staff at Process Excellence Network

Published 6 April 2009

Productivity improvement will be a major challenge and concern in the years just ahead.

Productivity, as we've all heard a good many times by now, is the key to managing the inflation many believe will occur because of the government's well-intended (but questionable) economic policies.

To have price stability, wages must not rise faster than productivity. A simple equation, formulated by C. Jackson Grayson Jr, former pricing commissioner/czar during the Nixon administration, explains this quite well:

[Wages — Productivity Increases = Price Increases]

For example, if wages increase by 10 percent and productivity increases by 3 percent, then the price increase would be 7 percent.

If wage increases gallop at a significantly faster rate than productivity, price inflation will occur.

We expect we will soon be hearing about gearing wages to productivity improvement guidelines. Unfortunately, many economists believe this never works.

One scenario predicted by several leading economists claims that using government spending to stimulate consumption is a sure-fire recipe for inflation. It will lead to too much money chasing too few goods and services.

Once the inflation starts—if, indeed it does—people will demand higher wages to keep up with the increasing cost of living. If wages increase faster than productivity increases, hyper-inflation is a possibility.



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/contributors/74-from-the-editorial-staff-at-process-excellence/


5 | P a g e


The only way our society will be able to maintain or enjoy a comfortable, let alone rising, standard of living is if managers in all enterprises solve the productivity puzzle. This is not an easy task.

MANAGING PRODUCTIVITY

Making resources productive is the specific job of management, as distinct from the other jobs of the "manager”: administration and entrepreneurship.

The world knows that Peter Drucker was the greatest management thinker of the last century. His story is a story of management itself.

According to Drucker, it is only managers—not nature or laws of economics or governments—that make resources productive.

Resources can be made productive in the individual plant or enterprise, the individual store, the individual hospital, the individual office, the individual research and development lab and the individual port.

They are made productive—or deprived of productivity—by individual managers within their own individual spheres of responsibility.

PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH INNOVATION

Thanks to Drucker we now know quite a bit about productivity improvement. We know that it is, in part, achieved by innovation—the shifting of resources from old and declining employments to new and more productive ones.

Organizations must be able to systematically identify emerging opportunities and develop the structures required to make the new and different happen.

In his book Innovation and Entrepreneurship (Harper & Row,1985), Drucker definitively described what must be done and how to do it with respect to making innovation an acquired organizational skill.

But—and this is a big but—organizations must be able to get rid of yesterday's tasks and free their energies and resources for new and more productive tasks. Abandonment is a prerequisite for innovation and change.

"If an organization wants to be able to work on opportunities, it must be able to abandon the unproductive and slough off the obsolete," Peter Drucker said.




6 | P a g e


No organization that purposely and systematically abandons the unproductive and obsolete ever wants for more productivity improvement opportunities. Ideas are always around in profusion.

The key, said Drucker, is to convert them into doing. Lack of creativity is, therefore, not the problem of today's organization. Rather it is organizational inertia which always pushes for continuing what we are already doing.

Drucker left no doubt that existing organizations must know how to organize for innovation. Otherwise the ongoing business will squash newness of more than a trivial dimension.

Internal entrepreneurship will be a major trend in most organizations. It is mission-critical if organizations want to leverage productivity improvement opportunities. But internal entrepreneurship requires systematic, organized, purposeful management.

Innovation within an existing organization is a device for moving scarce and expensive resources from areas of low productivity and non-results to opportunities for achievement and contribution.

MAXIMIZING PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT THROUGH CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

In addition to innovation, productivity is increased through the continuous improvement of the productivity of resources in existing deployments. Six Sigma advocates speak prescriptively of kaizen, or continuous improvement.

Trying routinely to get better one step at a time is a far better way to improve than shooting constantly for the big payoff. Major leaps into sudden business success are very rare.

Sustained success is largely a matter of focusing on streamlining and re-engineering existing processes. Getting better and better one process at a time leads to greater productivity improvement over time.

PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT VIA TECHNOLOGY

Technology can increase productivity if appropriately applied. Technology does not necessarily mean spin-offs from "science and engineering."

Techne, Peter Drucker reminded us, is the Greek word from which "technology” derives and means "useful knowledge," or "organized skill," rather than engineering.




7 | P a g e


The substitution of capital-intensive technology for labor-intense activities in many instances can help productivity improvement. But in certain areas such as health care, more capital-intensive equipment usually requires more skilled technologists to operate the equipment.

Translated, this means the substitution of capital for labor does not necessarily increase output or productivity and simultaneously lower costs.

In many instances, it just increases the quality of the output with a corresponding increase in costs.

Using a broader definition of technology, that is, "useful skill," points to the direction of more job-focused training. New and better skills must be continually acquired by today's labor force.

Organizations will have to upgrade the skills of their employees and/or find more talented employees to accommodate changing strategies. Organizations need people who can work smarter.

People will have to spend more time at their jobs away from their offices and labs attending conferences, seminars and short courses at universities and colleges. Further, they will have to spend more time when in the office taking webinars, virtual conferences and exchanging information with peers on social networks.

Indeed, acquiring and successfully applying useful knowledge to productive work is probably one of the best solutions for productivity improvement.

MANAGING THE KNOWLEDGE WORKER FOR INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY

Making the knowledge worker productive requires more than training and information acquisition. It requires knowing the factors that determine knowledge worker productivity.

What follows provides a more comprehensive viewpoint of how to manage and maximize knowledge worker productivity.

Peter Drucker listed six key factors that determine knowledge worker productivity. These are:

1. Knowledge worker productivity demands that we ask the question: “What is the task?”




8 | P a g e


2. It demands that we impose responsibility for their productivity on the individual knowledge worker themselves. Knowledge workers have to manage themselves. They have to have autonomy.

3. Continuing innovation has to be part of the work, the task and the responsibility of knowledge workers.

4. Knowledge work requires continuous learning on the part of the knowledge worker, but equally continuous teaching on the part of the knowledge worker (to facilitate the sharing of best practices).

5. Productivity of the knowledge worker is not—at least not primarily—a matter of quantity of output. Quality is at least as important.

6. Finally, knowledge worker productivity requires that knowledge workers are both seen and treated as an "asset" rather than a "cost." It requires that knowledge workers want to work for the organization in preference to all other opportunities.

Each of these are requirements that were noted by Drucker, except perhaps the last one—is almost the exact opposite of what is needed to increase the productivity of the manual worker.

In knowledge work quality is the essence of the output. For example, in appraising the performance of, say, surgeons in a given hospital, the question of how many patients has he/she operated on is quite secondary to the question of how many truly successful outcomes has she achieved?

Knowledge worker productivity, Drucker repeated again and again, has to aim first at obtaining quality—and not minimum quality. Maximum quality.

Only then, can one ask: "What is the volume, the quantity of work?"

In essence, when managing the knowledge worker, a rigorous operational definition of quality must be established. What results are expected?

Finally, Drucker thought the most crucial question in knowledge worker productivity is the first one: “What is the task?”

In manual work, the key question is always: "How should the work be done?" In manual work the task is always given.

The first requirement in tackling knowledge worker productivity is to find out what the task is so to make it possible to concentrate the knowledge worker on the task and to eliminate everything else.




9 | P a g e


CONCLUSION

Productivity is the key to managing inflation. To have price stability, wages must not rise faster than productivity.

Whether it is recognized or not, many practices for productivity improvement are derived largely from the thinking of Peter Drucker. His teachings form a blueprint for every thinking manager.

Read the original article here: A New Emphasis on Productivity Improvement



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/organizational-strategies-for-innovation-continuou/columns/a-new-emphasis-on-productivity-improvement/


10 | P a g e


"When a cynic asks, 'What if we train them and they leave?' winning organizations respond: 'what if we

don't train them and they stay?'"

- Peter F. Drucker




11 | P a g e


GETTING DOWN TO BUSY-NESS: KNOWLEDGE WORKERS ARE LESS PRODUCTIVE THAN EVER

Contributor: Robert W. Swaim

Published 29 March 2011

Knowledge is now the main product of advanced economies and the livelihood of the largest group of the population in developed countries. But how do you measure and improve the productivity of knowledge workers, asks columnist Dr. Robert Swaim, when you cannot readily observe what they are doing?

Peter Drucker coined the term “knowledge workers” over forty years ago and wrote the following in his book, Management Challenges for the 21st Century:

“The most valuable assets of the 20th-century company were its production equipment. The most valuable asset of a 21st-century institution, whether business or non-business, will be its knowledge workers and their productivity.” Peter F. Drucker

This article addresses the following questions and Drucker’s views with respect to knowledge and manual workers:

What is the difference between “Manual Workers” and “Knowledge Workers”?





12 | P a g e


Why has the productivity of manual workers dramatically increased during the 20th century, while productivity of knowledge workers has decreased?

What are the characteristics of knowledge workers, their job needs, what motivates them, and how to lead, not manage them?

How do you increase the productivity of knowledge workers and why this is important?

“Manual Workers” are those who essentially work with their hands, operate machines, assemble parts, etc. and are generally involved in the manufacture of a tangible product. The task of what they are to do is given, including the tools and equipment to use, with the focus on how to do it and to do things right, or efficiency. If manual workers leave the organization, the tools they used to perform their work generally remain behind with the organization. This may differ where certain trades require the craftsman to furnish their own tools such as in home building, but rare in most other cases such as an automobile manufacturing plant.

In knowledge work the task of what to do is controlled by knowledge workers, they own the means of production (knowledge not machines), they decide what methods and steps to use, and they focus on what to do and to the right things or effectiveness. When they leave an organization, they take the tools with them – knowledge.

Drucker identified another group that is in between both the manual worker and the knowledge worker, the “Technologist.” This is someone who may work with their hands but requires special knowledge, training, and skills to perform their work. As an example, an X-Ray technician in the hospital, the dental assistant who cleans your teeth, the Xerox service representative who repairs the copier and so forth.

Drucker felt this group was becoming the largest of the three but did not really focus on them in his discussions of the knowledge worker. He did acknowledge that technologist have to be treated as knowledge workers and that although the manual work of their job may comprise the majority of their time, the focus has to be on making the technologist knowledgeable, responsible, and productive as a knowledge worker. In that regard, much of what is contained in this article would also apply to the technologist, and I suggest, might also apply to most of today’s workforce other than perhaps the pure laborer digging a trench.




13 | P a g e


THE PRODUCTIVITY ACHIEVEMENTS OF MANUAL WORKERS

In the 20th century, organizations and management experts focused on increasing the productivity of “Manual Workers.” As a result, according to Drucker, there was a fifty-fold increase in the productivity of the manual worker due to the contribution of the early Classical School management theorist, Fredrick Taylor (Scientific Management) in the early 1900’s, and later in the century, by other contributors, such as Edward Deming (statistical quality control and quality management). As recently as the 1960s, almost fifty percent of all workers in industrialized countries were involved in making things or helping to make things.

Today however, less than twelve to seventeen percent of the employees in developed countries are involved in manual work – making things with their hands. In 1950, seventy three percent of employees in the United States worked in production or manufacturing while now less than fifteen percent do. This decrease was not created by globalization and the exporting of jobs by multinational companies to China and other low labor-cost countries as many in the U.S. Congress argue for the benefit of their labor union constituencies who are few in number but vocal.

It has largely been the direct result of the productivity gains in manual work as mentioned here.

Also, farmers were the backbone of most economies a century ago – not only in the numbers of people employed, but also in the value of what they produced. Now, in developed countries, few people are involved in farming work. As an example, in the 1900’s, eighty five percent of the United States workforce was employed in agriculture. Now only three percent of the U.S. workforce is employed in agriculture and most likely are illegal Mexicans, while in the world’s second largest economy, approximately thirty one percent of the Chinese population is still involved in farming today.




14 | P a g e


KNOWLEDGE WORK, KNOWLEDGE WORKERS AND PRODUCTIVITY

Knowledge work and the knowledge worker produce a different type of product, such as a new computer software program, a design for a new product, market research studies as to what opportunities the organization should pursue, etc. Typically, the output of a knowledge worker is someone else’s input and information for management decision-making. Knowledge workers are “specialists” in their own fields, and typically know more about their field than the managers they work for, which is why they are knowledge workers. This presents another challenge for the manager, how to manage someone who knows more about the job than you do?

In the 21st century organization and economy, there are now more knowledge workers than manual workers. Knowledge is now the main product of the advanced economy and the livelihood of the largest group of the population in developed countries. Increasingly, knowledge is the key factor in a country’s international economic strength and managers need to understand how to lead and increase the productivity of knowledge work.

Alvin Toffler in his book Revolutionary Wealth (2006) discusses three waves or movements. The first being the early transition from hunters to agriculture, the second from agriculture to industrialization, and now the third wave from industrialization to knowledge. Some developing nations such as China face the challenge of transitioning in two waves at the same time, from agriculture to industrial to absorb the over one hundred and fifty to two hundred million floating unemployed migrant workers from the rural areas of China, and from industrial to knowledge as China attempts to keep pace with the developed world in technological achievements.




15 | P a g e


HOW CAN YOU MEASURE AND INCREASE THE PRODUCTIVITY OF KNOWLEDGE WORK?

According to Drucker, “Where manual worker productivity has dramatically increased, the productivity of knowledge workers has been decreasing and the problem has not been addressed.” The question is how to measure and improve the productivity of knowledge workers when you really cannot observe what they are doing, as in the case of manual workers? Are they looking out the window at the birds, or are they creating a new product design? Drucker commented, “In terms of actual work on knowledge worker productivity we are, in the year 2000, roughly where we were in the year 1900, and a century ago, in terms of the productivity of the manual worker.”

REASONS FOR LOW KNOWLEDGE WORKER PRODUCTIVITY

As mentioned, Peter F. Drucker recognized this issue over 40 years ago. Some of the reasons he identified which contribute to decreasing knowledge worker productivity are as follows:

The tendency to confuse busyness (filling out paper, passing paper back and forth and attending meetings) with productivity

Knowledge work cannot be replaced by capital investment as in the case of manual work

Capital investment creates the need for more knowledge work and creates a demand for new and more highly paid employees

Few know how to deal with managing the knowledge worker and increasing their productivity. In fact, Drucker suggests that, “Knowledge workers need to be led, not managed.”




16 | P a g e


A recent survey of 10,000 knowledge workers in the United States revealed they feel they are less productive today compared to a decade ago and that they waste over two hours a day excluding lunch. Interesting, many attributed this to technology, namely the Internet and time consumed reading and responding to emails each day although some also played games. Another major reason cited by the respondents was not having enough work to do or they felt they were underpaid for the work they did do.




17 | P a g e


UNDERSTANDING THE KNOWLEDGE WORKER

To improve knowledge worker productivity, according to Drucker, it is necessary to understand the characteristics of knowledge workers, their job needs, and what motivates them. These are presented as follows:

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE KNOWLEDGE WORKER

HOW DO THEY LIKE TO WORK?

Knowledge workers have their own routines and patterns of work and therefore, they may not necessarily conform to 9 AM to 5 PM office hours.

They consider the productivity of their work to be the quality, not quantity, of their output of their work.

They are highly mobile and can move to a new company if learning and personal growth opportunities do not exist, or if they are underutilized in their present positions. As such, they are more committed to their professions rather than to the organization where they are employed.

They will work with associates in a team depending on the assignment but often prefer to work alone.

They must respect who they work for.

They need feedback but do not accept criticism of their work well.

The physical space where they work does not need to be too large but it should also not be a “black hole.”

They have a “mental space” and do not appreciate people intruding on it.

Their performance and energy levels operate in cycles – they are not machines that can be turned on and off easily.




18 | P a g e


WHAT KIND OF WORK DO THEY WANT AND HOW TO PERFORM IT?

Knowledge workers need challenging work – opportunities to pursue and problems to solve. Continuous innovation must be built into the job.

Their authorities and responsibilities need to be clear – what decisions can they make?

Knowledge workers need to take responsibility for the job and need productive work.

They are self-directed, but need leadership and support from their manager.

Continuous learning in their field of specialty and profession is extremely important.

Knowledge workers need feedback information in order to measure their own performance against standards and objectives.

WHAT MOTIVATES THEM TO PERFORM?

Knowledge workers are not motivated by fear, but are motivated by achievement – they want to see the results of their work.

They are self-motivated – given a positive organizational environment.

The value support – they want others to think that what they’re working on is important.

Money and promotional opportunities are low on their list of motivation factors – typically they are well paid and enjoy what they do. Their chief reward is in their job and the work itself – if it is meaningful and makes a contribution to the organization.

As can be seen, the characteristics, job needs and what motivates knowledge workers are considerably different than that of manual workers. In relation to popular motivational and leadership theories, knowledge workers can be considered to be at the highest level of motivational needs.

As an example, they are at the highest level of Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs Theory” in that they are motivated by “Self Actualization and Learning and Understanding Needs” rather than the lower level “Security and Safety Needs.” With respect to Frederick Hertzberg’s “Hygiene and Motivation Theory,” they are motivated by the need for “Achievement and the Quality of Their Work” rather than other “Hygiene Factors,” such as compensation and benefits and working conditions.




19 | P a g e


And in terms of David McClelland’s “Needs Theory” they are motivated by the “Need for Achievement,” rather than the needs for “Power” or “Affiliation.”

It is not practical to expand on all of the motivational theories sited here. For those not familiar with these and other motivational theories, I suggest a reference text written by Steven P. Robbins, Organizational Behavior. As previously noted in an earlier article, Drucker took a relatively dim view of the various leadership and motivational theories that emanated from the Behavioral School although he did have is own views on these topics that were covered in that article such as it is easier to de-motivate than motivate people including knowledge workers.




20 | P a g e


GUIDELINES FOR IMPROVING THE PRODUCTIVITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF KNOWLEDGE WORKERS

According to Drucker, increasing the productivity of the knowledge worker requires addressing a number of key factors and asking some important questions. These have been incorporated into a checklist for easier reference compared to searching for the key points on knowledge workers in Drucker’s books that are mainly narratives. It should also be interesting to ask yourself as you review the checklist, do these factors apply only to knowledge workers or everyone who works for me (manual workers, technologists, managers who report to me, etc.)?

There are Eight Major Factors and key questions associated with each factor to consider that are outlined below. Also building on the checklist, each factor will be addressed in detail.

DEFINING THE “TASK” OR THE “RESULTS”

According to Drucker, “The first requirement in tackling knowledge work is to find out what is the task is so to make it possible to concentrate knowledge workers on the task and eliminate everything else – at least as far as it can possibly be determined.”

This initially can create some confusion in terms of attempting to differentiate between the knowledge worker’s “job” (Market Research Analyst), the “tasks” that the knowledge worker performs (conducts market research surveys, designs survey questionnaires, conducts focused interviews, etc. and the desired “results” (delivers a market research report on a particular market segment in China).

It was also felt that Drucker deviated here from his holding people accountable and responsible for “results” by now focusing on how these results are to be achieved – the “task.” To maintain consistency, we should focus on the “desired results” the knowledge worker is expected to produce – not the tasks.




21 | P a g e


THE EIGHT KEY FACTORS IN KNOWLEDGE WORKER PERFORMANCE

1. Define Results: What results is the knowledge worker to produce?

2. The Job Assignment: What is the job the knowledge worker is to be assigned to or in now?

3. Task and Time Assessment: What are the tasks the knowledge worker is to perform and over what period of time? When do we expect the results?

4. Agreement on Objectives and Their Measurement: What objectives will be mutually agreed to and how will they be measured?

5. Providing Support: What support does the knowledge worker require to produce the results (budget, information, your coordination to involve others, etc.)?

6. Feedback and Self-Feedback Systems: How will the knowledge worker be able to measure his or her progress (self-control)?

7. Recognition: How do you plan to recognize the knowledge worker for producing the desired results (financial and non-financial rewards)?

8. Continuous Learning: What continuous learning and self-development experience will be made available to the knowledge worker (courses, seminars, professional conferences, and associations, etc.)?

The following is a more detailed discussion of each of these eight factors and key questions to ask relative to the factor.

FACTOR #1: DEFINING RESULTS

Drucker stressed that the starting point in managing knowledge workers and their productivity is a definition of “results.” What is the final product the knowledge




22 | P a g e


worker is to produce? Drucker also outlined “Four Dimensions” with respect to defining results that include; The Quality and Quantity Dimension, The Time Dimension, The Resource Dimension, and The Restrictions and Limitations Dimension. These Dimensions are summarized in the following checklists for easy reference.

THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY DIMENSION

What should the quality and quantity of the results be?

How will quality and quantity be measured (agreed upon standards)?

THE TIME DIMENSION

When should these results be delivered?

Is when the results are expected to be delivered flexible enough to allow the knowledge worker time to perform?

THE RESOURCE DIMENSION

What financial resources are needed to produce the results (budget)?

What special knowledge and skills will be needed by the knowledge worker to produce the desired results?

What additional resources may be required (clerical support, research assistants, other knowledge workers, etc.)

THE RESTRICTIONS AND LIMITATIONS DIMENSION

What restrictions and limitations exist that must be considered (limited budget, hiring freeze, other restrictions, etc.)?

FACTOR #2: THE JOB ASSIGNMENT

According to Drucker, “Assignment control is the key to knowledge worker productivity.” Here again, Drucker suggests there are “Three Dimensions” to the Job Assignment; The Selection Dimension, The Autonomy and Responsibility Dimension, and The Knowledge Worker Reflection and Work Plan. A checklist is provided again for easy reference.




23 | P a g e


THE SELECTION DECISION DIMENSION

Who has the best strengths for this assignment (knowledge, skills, qualifications, and experience) to produce the desired results?

Can an individual complete the assignment or will it require a team of knowledge workers? If a team, who should be included and who should be the team leader?

Is this assignment the best one for this knowledge worker(s) that will produce the desired results?

Is this the best use of the knowledge worker?

Is this the best assignment for this person? Does it utilize his or her strengths?

Will this assignment present a challenge for the knowledge worker?

Is this assignment an opportunity to pursue or a problem to solve? If a problem, how long will the knowledge worker be dedicated to solving it?

THE AUTONOMY AND RESPONSIBILITY DIMENSION

Will the knowledge worker be provided the autonomy to complete the assignment or is there a tendency of the manager to want to over or micromanage the project?

Will the knowledge worker be able to make decisions relative to his or her work? What decisions will require additional approval?

What will the knowledge worker be responsible for – and not responsible for?

What responsibilities will the manager of the knowledge worker retain?

KNOWLEDGE WORKER REFLECTION & WORK PLAN DIMENSION

How will the assignment be performed to produce the desired results?

Has the knowledge worker been provided time for reflection on what work needs to be done and how to produce the desired results?

What are the tasks that need to be completed? Who should perform these tasks and in what order? Will some tasks of other knowledge workers or




24 | P a g e


support people be input for other tasks? (See Knowledge Worker’s Preliminary Work Plan for an example.)

How will progress be measured (objectives, milestones, and feedback and self-feedback systems)?

FACTOR #3: TASK ANALYSIS AND TIME ASSESSMENT

In assessing the Tasks to be completed and the Time to complete them in, several key questions needed to be asked by both the manager and the knowledge worker who has been assigned to produce the results. This could also be considered part of the knowledge worker’s reflection prior to starting the project. The key questions to answer are also included in the checklists.

TASK ANALYSIS CHECKLISTS

THE “WHAT?”

Check the need and use of the job considered.

What is being done?

What is the purpose?

Is it essential? Would the sky fall down on us if we stopped doing it?

What keeps you from doing your tasks and should be eliminated?

THE “WHERE?”

In order to check if the place where we are doing something is the most appropriate one.

Where is the job performed? Why?

Could it be performed somewhere else, in a more economical and satisfactory manner? Outsourced?

THE “WHEN?”

In order to make sure that the job is being carried out at the most appropriate time.

When is the job being carried out? Why?

Is this the best time to do it?




25 | P a g e


Could it be done in another sequence?

What is the current status toward achieving the knowledge worker’s present objectives?

THE “WHO?”

In order to make sure that the person who performs the job is the most appropriate one.

Who does this job? Why? Who could or must do it? Why?

Could a more qualified person do it more economically?

Could a less qualified person do it after being trained?

Could the tasks be outsourced?

THE “HOW?”

In order to find out whether the job can be simplified or better performed, with less complication, higher quality, and lower cost.

How is the job done? Why?

Could it be done in an easier and simper way?

Can it be done with higher quality, without introducing complications?

Are the means used the most appropriate?

Are there alternative means or other ways of doing the job that are better than the present ones?

Which things make the job complicated or difficult for the people who perform it? Could some things be eliminated?

As can be seen, there are number of important questions that need to be addressed in this area alone if the productivity of knowledge workers is to be improved.




26 | P a g e


FACTOR #4: OBJECTIVES AND THEIR MEASUREMENT DIMENSION

This Dimension is classic Drucker and directly from his book Managing for Results (1964) and later adopted in the Classical School as Management by Objectives (MBO). Since the practice of MBO is now over forty years old this checklist is relatively brief:

MBO as Applied to the Knowledge Worker

Knowledge and Objectives - Knowledge workers require that demands be made on them by knowledge – rather than bosses and by objectives – not people.

Mutually Established - The knowledge worker’s objectives should be mutually established between the management and the knowledge worker and directly relate to the results to be produced and the tasks to be completed to produce the desired results.

Milestones – Establish milestones for each task and objective. The manager should not over manage, but needs information as to progress in achieving the desired results.

Reporting - The times the knowledge worker will report results or progress need to be determined.

FACTOR #5: PROVIDING SUPPORT

This factor includes a number of “Key Questions to Ask” in terms of providing support to the knowledge worker.

PROVIDING SUPPORT – KEY QUESTIONS

Support Required - What can management do to help the knowledge worker do his or her job? Ask when discussing the “Knowledge Worker’s Preliminary Work Plan” and provide the support that is required.

Obstacles - What hinders the knowledge worker from doing the job? Ask and remove it.

Others – Who else needs to know about this assignment? Do they have to provide input to the knowledge worker to complete a task? Are they cooperative or acting in their own self interests and not as a team?




27 | P a g e


FACTOR #6: FEEDBACK & SELF FEEDBACK

Once again, the literature on providing feedback to people for their performance to sustain or improve performance is extensive. Thousands of books have been written on performance appraisal and so another tree will be spared here. Drucker did stress, although not entirely unique, that the best feedback for knowledge workers is self-feedback.

In essence then, the knowledge worker should be able to refer to his or her Work Plan and the tasks and milestones and be able to gauge where he or she is in the path to producing the desired results. This also relates to one of the characteristics of the knowledge worker in that they do not accept criticism well.

This is not to say that the manager avoids contact with the knowledge worker, or worse yet, adopts a Management by Exception (MBE) approach, one of the worst concepts ever developed in management theory. This is the old, “You have complete freedom to do what is necessary to get the job done – just don’t screw up and then you will hear from me.” In the MBE approach, the only time the knowledge worker sees his or her manager is when he or she makes a mistake and as such dreads seeing the manager. It does not take long for the relationship between the manager and knowledge worker to deteriorate. During the progress review, the manager should provide both positive and constructive feedback to the knowledge worker but care must be taken in how the constructive feedback is presented.

FACTOR #7: RECOGNITION

Another factor in Drucker’s approach to improving knowledge worker productivity is to provide recognition for producing the desired results, once again a concept not unique to Drucker. Recognition could be in the form of both financial and non-financial rewards. Since the knowledge worker wants to stay abreast of developments in his or her own field, allowing them to attend industry conferences and professional organizations on company time versus their own time is an inexpensive form of recognition. If the manager is unsure as to what non-financial rewards would be appealing to the knowledge worker, simply ask them. Recognition can also be provided by providing the knowledge worker with opportunities for self-development as covered in Drucker’s last factor.

FACTOR #8: CONTINUOUS LEARNING

The following are several of Drucker’s guidelines in dealing with the knowledge worker’s self development and the need for continuous learning, one of the job needs of knowledge workers previously discussed.




28 | P a g e


The knowledge worker should ask – what do I need to learn to keep up with the knowledge and know the things I am paid to know?

Knowledge workers should request their own training and development needs.

Training and development should be focused on people’s strengths, rather than on their weaknesses and limitations.

The objective is to do better the things that one already does well.

Everyone (knowledge workers) should be encouraged to teach and share their knowledge with others in the organization.

The knowledge worker should also ask, what do others need to know and understand about my area and what it can contribute to their own work?

Finally, the knowledge worker should ask what does my manager need to know about my knowledge in order to understand the opportunities, issues, and problems we need to deal with?

SUMMARY

The productivity of knowledge workers has not kept pace with the productivity of manual workers and in fact, has been decreasing. Management must know how to address this problem, since the number of knowledge workers as compared to manual workers in organizations, is increasing and will continue to do so.

A number of application tools that can be used in dealing with knowledge workers in your organization that should prove useful in applying a number of the concepts that were presented here can be obtained from the author, Dr. Robert Swaim, directly by contacting him on [email protected].

Click here to read the original article: Getting Down to Busy-ness: Knowledge Workers Are Less Productive than Ever



mailto:[email protected]

http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/people-performance-and-change-in-process-improveme/columns/the-growing-employee-population-or-are-they-employ/

http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/people-performance-and-change-in-process-improveme/columns/the-growing-employee-population-or-are-they-employ/


29 | P a g e


“There is nothing quite so useless, as doing with great efficiency, something that should not be done

at all.”

― Peter F. Drucker




30 | P a g e


ABANDONING THE OBSOLETE AND UNPRODUCTIVE: A DIFFICULT BUT NECESSARY TASK

A fruit tree grows stronger and fuller when it is pruned periodically. In a long-out-of-print book entitled The Folklore of Management, Clarence B. Randall, a retired president of Inland Steel, expressed this thought most elegantly:

"The world around, hearty men who make a living by harvesting the fruits of the soil know when and how to use the pruning knife. They have no more useful working tool...whether it be a French peasant who gives daily, almost hourly, care to his precious two hectares of sun drenched hillside soil in Burgundy, or the cherry grower of Michigan or the owner of an apple orchard in the Virginia, he preserves the quality of his product by his skill in removing deadwood...

... the significant thing about his operation, however, is that he works at it all the time...Never does he rush out in terror to lay about him with an ax, slashing indiscriminately right and left...he is steady and consistent about the whole process and keeps constantly at it…in the spring following a bumper crop, when he is sure he has a vintage product, he does the same amount of trimming as after one of those sad years when the hail damage has all but ruined him..."

THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR

Every enterprise, business or non-business, must constantly abandon the obsolete and the unproductive. Every organization is likely to be loaded down with yesterday's promises. These include activities and programs that no longer contribute; the ventures that looked so enticing when started, but now, five years later, are still unproductive.




31 | P a g e


The best therapy for any organization from the point of view of performance is to purge itself of mediocrities. Systematic sloughing off of yesterday frees energies and resources. It makes available the people and funds required for new things.

WHY PETER DRUCKER'S IDEAS STILL MATTER

The late Peter Drucker identified the key management challenge of the 21st century as leading change and believed that the first question to ask is: “What should we abandon?" He realized abandoning yesterday is excruciatingly difficult.

Modern organizations must be capable of change. Indeed, they must be able to initiate change, that is, innovation. It is essential to move scarce and expensive resources from areas of low productivity and non-results to areas where there are opportunities for achievement and contribution.

Drucker observed:

"Maintaining yesterday is difficult and time-consuming and therefore always commits the institution's scarcest and most valuable resources—and above all, its ablest people—to non-results...organizational inertia always push for continuing what we are already doing...

...organizations are always in danger of being overwhelmed by yesterday's tasks and being rendered sterile by them... An organization - whatever its objectives - must therefore be able to get rid of yesterday's tasks and thus free its energies and resources for new and more productive tasks."

CONTINUITY VS. CHANGE

Drucker's central theme involved the never-ending battle of continuity vs. change. He repeated over and over again that an organization's most able people tend to be committed to yesterday's tasks, which means they are not available to create tomorrow. Every strategic plan stresses what should be done. But Drucker reasoned that the initial emphasis of a strategic plan must focus on what to stop doing.

Weeding out the nonproductive activity garden is as important in "running HR like a business" as is in the example given by Randall. One sobering method of avoiding putting too much effort into the soil bed of yesterday's activities and programs is to raise the Drucker question, "If we were not presently doing this or that activity would we risk going into it today?"




32 | P a g e


Shortly after Jack Welch became CEO of General Electric in 1981, Business Week magazine reported, “He sat down with Drucker at the company's New York headquarters... Drucker posed two questions that arguably changed the course of Welch's tenure: 'If you weren't already in a business, would you enter it today?’ he asked. 'And if the answer is no, what are you going to do about it?'"

Those questions led Welch to a slew of abandonment decisions and to realize that "maintaining what no longer works draws your most valuable resources away from your number one job, creating tomorrow." Welch reinvented General Electric and is credited with allocating resources on the right results. And in the process, Welch made General Electric into one of America's most successful organizations.

WHY IS ABANDONMENT SO DIFFICULT?

Without doubt, abandoning yesterday is painfully difficult but necessary. Yesterday is comfortable. By contrast, the new and different always produce new problems. Custodial managers nurture yesterday far too long.

In short, it boils down to familiarity with and sentimentality for what already exists.

Organizations that are incapable of abandoning old and tired programs and activities are unlikely to make the new happen. Just asking the question, "What should we abandon or de-emphasize?" will force thinking and actions that can significantly improve operations and productivity.




33 | P a g e


"Successful enterprises create the conditions to allow their employees to do their best work."

-Peter F. Drucker




34 | P a g e


THE SECRET TO ACHIEVING MORE WITH LESS - THE PARETO PRINCIPLE IN ACTION

From the Editorial Staff at Process Excellence Network

Published 19 September 2011

Improving productivity requires abandoning things that do not work, never worked, or have outlived their usefulness and capacity to contribute. As both governments and businesses look out at a tough new operating environment that doesn't look set to change anytime soon, here's how Pareto analysis can help.

INTRODUCTION

Peter F. Drucker rendered explicit the interrelationship between and among three distinct concepts—namely, abandonment, concentration and Pareto's Law (a.k.a. the 80/20 Principle).

Abandonment and concentration, Drucker reminded us, are opposite sides of the same coin. Simply put, abandoning unproductive and obsolete activities frees up resources to concentrate on result areas.

However, deciding what to abandon is never easy. We all need a framework or methodology to help us decide what to stop doing... and to pinpoint areas we should concentrate efforts and resources.

Pareto analysis is one of many tools used to identify activities, programs, products and services that should be considered candidates for abandonment/de-emphasis.



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/contributors/74-from-the-editorial-staff-at-process-excellence/


35 | P a g e


PARETO'S PRINCIPLE

One of the best books ever written about the Pareto Principle is Richard Koch's The 80/20 Principle. It details how systematic and predictable lack of balance appears in data relating to a wide range of activities in both life and management activities.

Here's an excerpt from Koch's book:

"The pattern underlying the 80/20 Principle was discovered in 1897 by the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto (1848- 1923). His discovery has since been called many names, including the Pareto Principle... the Pareto Law... the 80/20 Rule... the Principle of Least Effort... and the Principle of Imbalance.

"So what did Pareto discover? He happened to be looking at patterns of wealth and income in 19th-century England. He found that most income and wealth went to a minority of the people in his samples."

Koch explains that, in essence, Pareto found that 20 percent of the population enjoyed 80 percent of the wealth in all the countries studied. Indeed, that's what really excited Pareto.

This pattern of imbalance was repeated consistently whenever he looked at data referring to different time periods or different countries.

It took many years for others to discover that Pareto's finding could be extended all kinds of resources. In most situations, a pattern of imbalance with respect to efforts and results is a near-certainty.

"In 1949, George K. Zipk, a professor at Harvard, discovered the ‘Principle of Least Effort,’ which was actually a rediscovery and elaboration of Pareto's principle..."

Ever so slightly paraphrasing Koch's summary of Zipk's principle:

Resources (people, products, time, knowledge, physical assets or anything else that can be made more productive) tends to arrange themselves so that approximately 20- 30 percent of any resource accounts for 70-80 percent of the activity related to that resource.

What does this really mean? More results can be squeezed out of existing resources. It's a good bet that an organization's resources are not as productive as they could be.




36 | P a g e


AN EXAMPLE

Drucker provided an excellent example of how nurses in a major hospital were asked a few questions in an employee survey:

What is your task?

What should it be?

What should you be expected to contribute?

What hampers you in doing your task, and should these obstacles be eliminated?

According to Drucker:

“The nurses were sharply divided as to what their task was, with one group saying ‘patient care’ and another saying ‘satisfying physicians.’ However, they were in complete agreement on the things that made them unproductive.

“They called them ‘chores:’ paperwork, arranging flowers, answering the phone calls of patients' relatives, answering the patient bells and so on.

“All—nearly all—of these could be turned over to a non-nurse floor clerk, [who are] paid a fraction of a nurse’s pay.

“When the nurses were freed of chores, their productivity nearly doubled, as measured by the time at the patients’ bedsides.

“Further, patient satisfaction more than doubled and turnover of nurses (which had been catastrophically high) almost disappeared, all within four months."

The point? Resources have a tendency to decline in productivity. But, as Drucker so clearly illustrates, the way to get more output from existing resources is to make the resource "work smarter."

Making resources productive is the specific job of management. In this case, a workplace survey revealed that a large percentage of the nurses' time was spent in non- nursing activities.

That percentage had to be favorably altered—a greater percentage of nursing time had to be directed towards the results desired.




37 | P a g e


Zipk's principle is valid. This means we have to constantly improve the productivity of resources in existing employments. "We know that we need to work on the productivity of each of the factors of production: capital, natural resources, time and knowledge."

Why? Because it's near-certain that the efforts-to-results ratio with respect to most resources is predictably unbalanced.

JURAN'S CONTRIBUTION

The other pioneer of the 80/20 Principle was the quality guru Joseph M. Juran. Indeed, he coined the phrases "Pareto Principle" and the "Rule of the Vital Few."

According to Juran, in any relevant data set a small number of elements will be responsible for the preponderant portion of results. In terms of results the vital few within the configuration or data set will always take precedence over the trivial many.

For example, if we assume there are five frequently cited reasons for customer complaints, one reason (20 percent of the reasons) probably accounts for 80 percent of the complaints. Efforts should be concentrated on the one reason causing the majority of complaints.

Still another example: While a manufacturer makes 20 different products, five of those products account for 75 percent of its customers complaints.

And still another example: While there may be 12 distinct steps in the process of transferring a patient out of an intensive care unit into a standard bed, two of those steps account for 82 percent of the total time in the total process.

LESSON LEARNED SO FAR?

Always look for the predictable imbalance. Breakdown the numbers. Disaggregate the data.

Expect the unexpected. Expect 20 percent to lead 80 percent... and 80 percent to lead to 20 percent. Always look for the powerful vital few. It's bound to be there.

This will enable you to spot the important things. Accept the reality that with respect to causes, inputs and efforts the majority have little impact. But, rather, a small minority of causes, inputs and efforts will have the major, dominant impact.




38 | P a g e


DRUCKER'S SUMMARY OF THE PARETO PRINCIPLE

Drucker repeatedly demonstrated how the application of Pareto's Law could be used in diagnosing patterns of potential misallocation of resources.

"Business enterprise is not a phenomenon of nature but one of society. In a social situation, however, events are not distributed according to a ‘normal distribution’ of a natural universe...

"In a social situation a very small number of events at one extreme—the first 10 percent to 20 percent at most—account for 90 percent of all results; whereas the great majority of the events accounts for 10 percent or so of the results.

“This is true in the marketplace: A handful of large customers out of many thousands produce the bulk of orders; a handful of products out of hundreds of items in the line produce the bulk of the volume; and so on.

“It is true of sales efforts: A few sales people out of several hundred always produce two-thirds of all new business. It is true in the plant: A handful of production runs account for most of the tonnage.

“It is true in research: The same few people in the laboratory are apt to produce nearly all the important innovations.

“It holds true for practically all personnel problems: The bulk of grievances always comes from one group of employees (for example, from the older, married women or from the clean-up people on the night shift), as does the great bulk of absenteeism, of turnover, of suggestions under a suggestion system and accidents..."




39 | P a g e


PREDICTABLE IMBALANCES HAVE IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS

In short, Drucker, Zipk, Juran observed that aggregate data misinform, misdirect, mislead. It's a near-certainty that there's an imbalance present between efforts and results.

Every manager, to be effective, must assume an imbalance exists with respect to resource allocation. And must work hard to incrementally change the ratio.

The relationship between efforts and results are generally in a state of imbalance. The imbalance may be 65/35, 70/30, 75/25, 80/20 or 99/1, or any set of numbers in between.

The key is to alter the ratio between effort and results. For example, if a manager could change the percentage proportion from 90-10 to 60-40, 70-30 or even 80-20, misallocation could be reduced and results improved.

To be specific, if 10 percent of the sales force is contributing 90 percent of the results and the other 90 percent of the sales force is producing most of the cost, then the elimination of marginal performers and improvement of the mediocre performers should be a priority commitment.

Eliminating non-productive efforts, that is, abandonment will enhance performance and make resources more productive.

TO SUMMARIZE

Improving productivity requires abandoning things that do not work, never worked, or have outlived their usefulness and capacity to contribute.




40 | P a g e


It also requires concentrating on the things that do work—the things that produce results—or the things that improve the organization's ability to perform.

Economic results, Drucker reminded us, require efforts be concentrated on the few activities that are capable of producing significant business results.

In making a distinction between the vital few and the trivial many, management can improve its asset management by making its capital work more effectively. The more the Pareto Principle is explored, the greater the relevance to improving the productivity of all resources.

Drucker frequently mentioned—indeed, emphasized—that:

"In every industry there are institutions that operate at an essentially higher productivity level than the average... What makes one company stand out and lead in any one industry is that it operates at about twice the average productivity of its industry..."

Most of today's managers have grown up in a period of rapid economic growth. Productivities have become endangered because they have been neglected.

In many organizations, to reverse the trend in productivities is a major managerial task. It requires abandonment of obsolete and unproductive activities. It requires focusing resources on what works.

It requires, among other tools and techniques, systematic application of the Pareto Principle.

Read the original article here: The Secret to Achieving More with Less - The Pareto Principle in Action



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/people-performance-and-change-in-process-improveme/columns/the-secret-to-achieving-more-with-less-increasin/

http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/people-performance-and-change-in-process-improveme/columns/the-secret-to-achieving-more-with-less-increasin/


41 | P a g e


"The first sign of decline of a company is loss of appeal to qualified, able, and ambitious people."

- Peter F. Drucker




42 | P a g e


THE DEMOTIVATION TRAP AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT

Contributor: Robert W. Swaim

1 March 2011

Understand Drucker’s approach to motivation, and you can forget the countless other books on employee motivation. In this month's Drucker Files, Dr. Robert Swaim - student, colleague and friend of Peter Drucker for thirty years - summarizes Drucker's Seven Keys to inspiring performance in your people.

There are many textbook definitions of what managers are supposed to do; the job of the manager, but perhaps one of the more pragmatic definitions is one by Peter Drucker:

“A manager is paid to enable those people who are able and capable of work to earn their wage and not hinder them in the process.” Peter Drucker at the Claremont Graduate School (1976).

Along this line, Dr. Drucker pointed out that, “People know they are on the payroll to get work out. They respect this and also want to respect the company and manager they work for. When people are not allowed to do the work they are paid for, they lose respect.”

THE SEVEN KEYS TO MOTIVATION

There are Seven Key Areas in which Drucker suggested the manager needs to ask questions relative to motivating performance and include:

1. The performance of your people.





43 | P a g e


2. Time – the scare resource

3. Taking responsibility for the relationship with others.

4. Establishing and maintaining the relationships with others.

5. Accountability for results.

6. Relationship with your manager.

7. Assignment control and staffing.

AREA 1: PERFORMANCE

In terms of motivating the performance of your people, Drucker suggested the first thing you as a manager can do today is to ask the following questions:

What does this organization do that allows your people to do the job they are paid for?

When you have identified what “helps,” – provide them with more. When you have identified what “hinders,” – remove it. In terms of what hinders your employees the most, don’t speculate and assume you know – ask your employees.

AREA 2: TIME

Am I wasting my people’s time?

Another area worthy of exploration is the resource of time. No matter what the demand for time, there is no more supply – it is a perishable resource. Investigate to see if you are taking time away from your people by making them do things they really aren’t paid for.

In other words, make sure your people can do the work they are paid for and have the necessary tools to do it.

AREA 3: UNDERSTANDING RELATIONSHIPS

Who depends on me for information, ideas, products, etc.?

Whose input is my output?




44 | P a g e


Who do I depend on for my input?

As a manager you must take responsibility for your relationship. When you have answered these questions, take the responsibility for establishing and maintaining the relationship. It will probably be no surprise to find many of these relationships

are with your counterparts in other functional areas. Drucker pointed out that, “Work and information flow sideways thorough the organization, not through the organization chart.”

Therefore, it would also be helpful to keep in mind you are responsible for the work of other people, not just subordinates. This includes yourself, your manager, your peers, and finally, your subordinates, in the order of easiest to control, to most difficult to control.

AREA 4: MAINTAINING RELATIONSHIPS

This logically leads to the fourth area of how to establish and maintain these relationships, and can be summarized by a very simple Drucker Rule:

“Don’t ever assume there are mind readers at work.” Peter Drucker

Drucker, in support of this rule stated, “There is no such thing as a communications problem – you have not told them and furthermore, assumed they understood.”

Therefore, concentrate on relationships, not communications. You can’t assume that people you deal with don’t need to know – take responsibility by keeping them informed and let them make the decision whether they need to know or not. People do not trust things they do not understand, so make sure they understand. They may not approve of what you are doing, but they should at least know what you are trying to do. Also, it is important they understand what you are not trying to do otherwise people will be working on it.




45 | P a g e


AREA 5: ACCOUNTABILITY

The fifth area you should investigate is accountability by asking the next series of questions:

What do you do that explains your being on the payroll?

Why do you do this work?

If you don’t do this, what happens?

When you have answered these questions, take the responsibility for the results and contribution, and demand the same of everyone who reports to you.

After you have accomplished this, appraise the results of your people, don’t judge. Your job is not to judge people, but to get them to perform. With respect to this analysis or appraisal, don’t let effort absorb you, remind yourself of why it is done, and what is the result supposed to be.

AREA 6: RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR MANAGER

The sixth area to explore closely corresponds to relationships and specifically, the relationship you have with your manager. In this regard, it would be helpful to ask him the following questions:

What do I need to know about what you are trying to do?

What is it that he considers to be our organization’s greatest contribution?

What is it you think I should be doing to support you?

What is it I should be concentrating on and held accountable for?

When you have answers to these questions, establish a priority list of what must be done, and begin by concentrating on the first thing on your list. When you have completed the first thing, don’t go on to number two on the list, but rather make another priority list. You may find number two is still number two, replaced by something more critical.




46 | P a g e


AREA 7: ASSIGNMENT CONTROL

The seventh and final area is Assignment Control, or as traditional management texts describe as staffing. Every six months, make a list of the people who report to you, and deliver and produce.

Then ask the question:

Are they assigned where the results are?

If they are not assigned where the demands are for results, they are being mis-allocated. Look at these assignments every six months in terms of planning. Drucker stated, “Plans fail because you don’t allocate an individual who can perform.” If you identify an opportunity in your plan that can be exploited, it should be staffed with people who can deliver.

In terms of making this list, don’t get confused between performance and potential. If you have someone on the list that has potential, ask what he or she has done? Don’t be misled by those with high potential, but don’t deliver, look for low potential people who perform. Drucker expanded on this idea by indicating that, “Low potential people have learned to perform, to do honest work and not to fail because they are not bright enough to improvise.”

Finally, don’t leave high performing people assigned to the problem areas too long for it is a poor use of them. Assigning the best salesmen to move the dead products in Drucker’s view, “May be an honest and respectable goal, but it is hard work, useless, and the quickest way to create a market for competition.”




47 | P a g e


DRUCKER ON MOTIVATION

“There are only two books that a publisher does not lose money on - cook books and books on motivation. The reason is they are purchased by people who can do neither.” Peter Drucker

DRUCKER’S CRITICISM OF THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES AND MOTIVATIONAL THEORIES

“There have been no major substantive intellectual breakthroughs in our understanding of employee motivation since the Hawthorne Study of seventy years ago (Elton Mayo)." - Peter Drucker.

Drucker’s quote above is in reference to a major event that led to the evolution of the Human Relations School in the 1930s. This was the conclusions that were generally reached as a result of the infamous “Hawthorne Studies” by Elton Mayo and his colleagues at Harvard, F.J. Roethlisberger and T. N. Whitehead. Although the studies were originally designed to attempt to measure changes in the employees’ working environment and their effect on productivity (the “Illumination Experiments”), it was finally discovered that the changes that were observed were the result of other factors, such as how the employees were treated.

This lead to the “human relations-be kind to people” approach to motivation that was really more manipulative than sincere in attempts to improve productivity. Drucker therefore felt that nothing meaningful in the way of research on motivation has occurred since then.

Of the 39 books Drucker wrote, not one was solely dedicated to discussing leadership and motivation. In fact, Drucker had little use for the behavioral sciences. Drucker’s major criticism of the behavioral science was that many of their theories focused on job satisfaction and ignored productivity. The problem he cited here was that there was no measurement as to what employee satisfaction really is. If the mean score on the results of employee attitude surveys registered 85, are the employees more satisfied than if the score was 75?

Drucker also argued that there was no evidence from the behavioral sciences to substantiate that employee satisfaction results in any better organizational performance – in other words a “happy worker” is not necessarily a productive




48 | P a g e


worker. Actually, Drucker did feel Frederick Herzberg’s “Two-Factor” theory of motivation was useful as a diagnostic tool in terms of assessing an organization’s environment from the perspective of “dissatisfiers” that tended to support his own views on motivation. Drucker therefore made a limited contribution to this school based on a somewhat simplistic approach to leadership and motivation as shared in this article.

THE RESEARCH SUPPORTS DRUCKER’S VIEWS

Many studies have been conducted in an attempt to show a relationship between job satisfaction and productivity and the results of those studies actually support Drucker’s views in terms of their inability to prove a positive relationship. Some other studies have actually suggested a causal relationship exists in the opposite direction in that productivity leads to job satisfaction. These studies concluded that, “If you do a good job, you intrinsically feel good about it. Additionally, assuming that the organization rewards productivity, your higher productivity should increase verbal recognition, your pay level, and probabilities for promotion. These rewards, in turn, increase your level of satisfaction with the job.” Once again, this different relationship may actually support Drucker’s views on motivation.

“It is easier to de-motivate people than to motivate them.” Peter Drucker

Drucker took a completely different and unique approach to the subject of motivation by expressing the following views:

It is easier to de-motivate people.

The best way to motivate people is through example.

To set an example by having standards, both of performance and of basics, by realizing that being a manager is not a rank and a privilege, but a responsibility.

To motivate professionals, knowledge people, and managers is by making demands on them for performance and responsibility. (Note: the next article will deal with the growing number of knowledge workers compared to manual workers and their unique job and personal needs and how to measure their performance.)




49 | P a g e


WHAT DE-MOTIVATES YOUR PEOPLE?

In keeping with Drucker’s view, refer to the following statements and ask if you and your organization are contributing to some of these de-motivators?

MY ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT:

Creates a company environment of internal politics as the way to get promoted.

Promotes destructive internal competition between workers.

Changes the rules in the middle of a project.

Creates unclear expectations regarding employee's performance and results.

Creates a bureaucracy of forms and reports and unnecessary rules for individuals to follow.

Over manages (tells what to do, how to do, and controls) vs. leading and does not allow autonomy.

Withholds information that individuals need to perform their jobs, lying, and claiming it’s a misunderstanding.

Takes time from people by having them attend unproductive meetings.

Emphasizes criticism and negative feedback vs. recognition and positive feedback.

Tolerates poor performance of others so that high performing people feel taken advantage of.

Treats people unfairly and show favoritism to a select few.

Underutilizes the capabilities of people and inhibits their personal growth.




50 | P a g e


WHAT SHOULD YOU DO AS MANAGER?

Refer to the above statements. These were management actions that Drucker felt contributed to employee de-motivation. Which actions do you and your organization need to change to create a more positive and motivating environment? Also review the seven key areas Drucker suggested contribute to organizational performance and answer the key questions relative to each area. Ideally, you will find Drucker’s approach to be more useful as compared to reviewing the countless number of books and theories on employee motivation.

Read the original article here: The Demotivation Trap and What You Can Do About It



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/people-performance-and-change-in-process-improveme/columns/peter-drucker-and-productvity/


51 | P a g e


“Efficiency is doing the thing right. Effectiveness is doing the right thing.”

― Peter F. Drucker




52 | P a g e


5 GLOBAL “CERTAINTIES” YOU CAN’T AFFORD TO IGNORE

By William Cohen, PHD, First Published 25 October 2011

Drucker wrote that the purpose of strategy is to enable an organization to achieve its desired results in an unpredictable environment. So contrary to what many believe, strategy is not about achieving results in a known and foreseeable environment, but an environment that is unknown and unforeseeable. In Drucker’s own words, it allows an organization to be “purposefully opportunistic.”

THE FIVE CERTAINTIES

Drucker was never afraid to propose ideas which others may never have even considered, and this was certainly the case with the five environmental variables which he felt were phenomena so unique that they could safely be considered certainties and not just possibilities as we normally assume for fixed variables that we sometimes call “environmental.”

Moreover, he believed that they were different from anything current strategies considered as they were not essentially economic, but were primarily social and political.

CERTAINTY #1: COLLAPSING BIRTHRATE IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD

Drucker found the falling birthrate in the developed world to be a phenomenon unique in history, with dramatic collateral effects and important secondary effects. Perhaps the most obvious change was in the very old assumption that markets would continue to increase as the population increased.

How many times have we heard that markets are bound to enlarge due to simply to the automatic increase in birthrate? But Drucker looked at the facts and found that birthrates were no longer steadily increasing for populations in the developed world.





53 | P a g e


Of course the decline in birthrate could be somewhat offset, delayed, or somewhat concealed by immigration. But even this would result in dramatic changes and would also cause turmoil as border populations with different, customs, religions, and even languages were attracted into countries of diminished numbers of younger workers.

Drucker saw several important secondary effects resulting from the collapsing birthrate. He said that for the immediate future demographics would dominate the politics in developed countries, shunted aside only temporarily by wars and economic conditions.

Eventually government instability in developed countries would likely soon become the norm. The definition of the concept of retirement was certain to change. While early “retirement” would continue, it would no longer mean a return to childhood in some kind of golden year’s playground. Rather it might mean extended employment with the former employer, but under a different name and conditions.

We have seen this come to pass even before the onset of the current recession.

Drucker noted that older workers, especially the knowledge worker who worked primarily with his mind and not his hands would become increasingly productive. He speculated that firms that first discovered how best to utilize this experienced talent in a new type of relationship would acquire a significant competitive advantage.

Perhaps of even more direct importance would be the effect on potential markets. The size of the youth and younger market would inevitably decline and the senior market increase. But the increase in potential would not only be due to numbers of potential customers, but to the individual purchasing power of those who retired from a first career and continued to find employment while in a “retired” state.

CERTAINTY #2: SHIFTS IN DISTRIBUTION OF DISPOSABLE INCOME

Drucker found that the truly important statistic that most companies overlook completely is the share of disposable income that is being spent on the products or services that they provide.

Drucker believed that this figure was the most reliable in formulating strategy as it changed very little over long periods while any change in trends of disposable income are crucial to a firm’s strategy. He concluded that utilizing this certainty required both quantitative information and qualitative analysis.

Thus another example of looking at data but deciding what the data meant rather than primarily crunching numbers.

CERTAINTY #3: CHANGING DEFINITION OF PERFORMANCE




54 | P a g e


According to Drucker, the traditional view of performance has been that the corporation was run for the interest of the manual worker, at least in Japan, Germany, Scandinavian countries and some others. Of course, in the U.S. and Britain, the interests have been somewhat different, at least since the late 1920s.

Though not clearly defined, business is supposed to be run for an ill defined conglomeration of interests including customers, employees, shareholders, and society. The only big question is whether this should be short term for gain in stock price, or longer term for future growth.

Drucker noted that even “long term” isn’t necessarily all that long since the average span of a “successful” enterprise in the U.S. is usually less than thirty years. The resulting fixed certainty was many traditional views would need to be revised including the definition of performance.

These new definitions of performance would have a clear impact on strategy, would be based on longer term estimates, and less and less on “social harmony,” and that performance would need to be defined non-financially with a nonfinancial “value” return. Only in this way would this be meaningful to knowledge workers and generate the commitment which today is frequently termed “engagement.”

CERTAINY #4: INCREASING GLOBAL COMPETITION

According to most definitions of global competitiveness, this has to do with competiveness of nations. Each year the World Economic Forum compiles a weighted average of many different components measured by publically available data and surveys of a country’s relative competitiveness globally. That’s not what Drucker was talking about with this certainty.

As he looked into the future, no small business, giant corporation, hospital, university, you name it could ignore institutions outside of its own national boundaries. It could neither succeed, nor even survive, without measuring up to standards set by the leaders in its industry anywhere on the planet.

Of considerable benefit if our political, corporate, and labor leaders would simply integrate the knowledge into their strategies it was Drucker’s contention that traditional means of protection of home industries no longer protects, “no matter how high the customs duties nor how low the import quotas.”

Drucker predicted the struggles now occurring for increased protectionism. He said that the net result of protectionism would not solve a nation’s problems, or a particular institutions, only make individual companies even more vulnerable.




55 | P a g e


The only solution was for the organization to find a way to compete considering the standards set by the best organizations in every area of management no matter where located, and essentially to consider such issues as government subsidies of global competitors as environmental variables which must be overcome by superior strategies, not by similar protection strategies of its own government.

CERTAINTY #5: GROWING INCONGRUENCE BETWEEN ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION AND POLITICAL SPLINTERING

Drucker’s first successful book, The End of Economic Man took on the historic notion that man behaved rationally in response to economics. According to Drucker, the rise of Nazism disproved that theory.

Sixty years later Drucker revisited his earlier work in a management context and strategy development. His conclusion: even within transnational economic units, national politics will invariably overrule economic rationality.

Managers in all industries and disciplines are well advised to consider these certainties as equally important to traditional environmental variables usually considered the sole factors in developing strategy.

Read the original article here: 5 Global Certainties You Can’t Afford to Ignore



http://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/organizational-strategies-for-innovation-continuou/columns/5-global-certainties-you-can-t-afford-to-ignore/


56 | P a g e


ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Dr. Robert W. Swaim was a colleague and personal friend of Drucker’s for nearly thirty years and worked with him for five years prior to his death to develop both the Drucker EMBA and Executive Development Programs that are now offered in China. He is no doubt the foremost authority in Asia on Drucker’s work

and in this article he attempts to relate a number of Drucker’s concepts to today’s present uncertain environment – what would Drucker have said about this and would his concepts still be applicable? Dr. Swaim also expands on these views in his new book that was released in 2010, The Strategic Drucker: Peter Drucker’s Strategies for Business Growth published by John Wiley and Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd. He may be reached via email at: [email protected].

To see a full list of articles authored by Dr. Robert W. Swaim please go to PEXNetwork.com/RobertSwam

Dr. William F. Cohen was Peter Drucker’s first executive Ph.D. graduate at what is now the Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management. His latest books are Drucker on Leadership (Jossey-Bass, 2010) and Heroic Leadership: Leading with Integrity and Honor (Jossey-Bass, 2010). Cohen is the president of The Institute of Leader Arts and a vice president of the

26 Peter F. Drucker Academies of China and Hong Kong. He is also a retired Air Force general. He can be reached at www.stuffofheroes.com.

To see a full list of articles authored by Dr. William F. Cohen, please go to PEXNetwork.com/WilliamCohen





http://www.stuffofheroes.com/



57 | P a g e


LEARN MORE ABOUT PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENT THROUGH LEAN SIX SIGMA & BPM

If you’d like to continue your learning, this year’s PEX Week Orlando will be looking at how you can achieve operational efficiencies and take your workforce to higher levels of productivity through Lean, Six Sigma, BPM and operational excellence.

The event takes place 21-25 January 2013 in Orlando, Florida. To find out more about this event or to register, please visit www.pexweek.com.






58 | P a g e


ABOUT US

What is the Process Excellence Network?

PEX Network is an online, free to join, membership portal providing process professionals with exclusive access to a library of multimedia resources from top executives on Lean Six Sigma, BPM, Operational Excellence, Continuous Improvement and other process excellence related topics.

The Process Excellence Network has a subscribed membership of 80,000+ with an additional 20,000 connected to us via our social networks and a global contact database of over 450,000.

In addition to online resources, PEX Network organizes 30+ targeted face-to-face events globally per year with industry specific focuses on Financial Services, Telecoms & Utilities, and Energy. We also hold major cross industry summits on process excellence in Orlando, FL (PEX Week) and in London, England (PEX Week Europe) every January and April.

Contact Us

Website: www.pexnetwork.com

General Inquiries: [email protected]

Telephone: +44 (0)20 7368 9300

About the Editor

Diana Davis is editor of PEXNetwork.com and follows trends in process excellence including Lean, Six Sigma, and BPM. She worked previously as a producer with Associated Press Television News and she has also worked in marketing and business development in the software industry. Davis holds a Master's in International Journalism from City University, London and a BA in English from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. She can be reached on [email protected]





making knowledge workers more productive insights from the works of peter f. drucker

Documents