|  |     re: .9
    
    I'll assume here, rik, that you're suggesting viewpoints
    of management that some people *may* have.  Or, more
    specifically, I'm assuming that you're *not* asserting
    as fact the following quoted points:
    
  �  4. most managers, in dec, upon becoming managers, start attending
  �  seminars and facilitations that teach them the proper methods
  �  of duping, coercing, managing, motivating...etc...which usually
  �  instills what i consider to be an unrealistic image of
  �  themselves, the company and the employees....
  �  
  �  5. most people who want to be managers in the first place
  �  are the type of people who LIKE power! who like giving orders
  �  and who enjoy following the orders of their superiors regardless
  �  of logic and or morality/ethics. This type of manager tends
  �  to promote other people like her/him which perpetuates the
  �  lack of moral/ethical reasoning in management and widens (or
  �  strengthens) the gap between employees and managers.
   
    Let's assume that someone were to assert point number four.  From
    the perspective of having taken a fair amount of management training
    (and from working in an HR/Training group), I'd reply that the
    notions of coersion and "duping" are unrealistic.  Further, the
    overall thrust of management education is to give managers a 
    *more* realistic view of themselves and their employees.  
    
    The basic job contract for all employees (generically, in "all"
    companies) is to help the employer achieve the company's goals
    in return for remuneration.  The very clear philosophy in DEC
    is that a "happy" employee is more productive than an unhappy
    one.  Therefore, one part of a manager's job is to ensure that
    her/his department is not filled with disgruntled people.  This
    is not to say that such departments don't exist nor that some
    managers don't seem to have gotten this message.  However, it is
    to state that, to the extent that an employee feels duped or 
    coerced, (and remember, mgrs. are employees, too), the manager
    instilling that feeling has failed part of the assignment.
    
    As often as not, it's a matter of perception.  Here's an example
    from my own experience.   Around '82, I was working as a Materials
    systems (user) analyst/trainer/support person/gopher, etc; my 
    previous job had been as a Material Planner, so I considered Mat'ls
    planning to be a step backward.  One day, my new manager came to
    me and said that he needed me to do some planning work for some
    new products (who remembers DECmates, Pro's, and Rainbows?).  To
    hear this didn't make me a real happy camper and I basically said
    "I don't wanna." 
    
    Fortunately for me, my mgr. was pretty sharp and spent considerable 
    time with me explaining the why's and also showing me how this 
    could be a step upward (not easy discussions as I was, um, somewhat
    difficult to talk to).  In any case, he was clearly hearing my 
    upset - was very "sensitive" and let me know that he felt my unhappiness
    was valid, etc.  He also, in supportive terms, made it clear that
    this was the work that needed doing and I was the "right" person
    for the job; he allowed me to see clearly that, if I chose not to
    accept the assignment, he had no work for me to do at the moment
    and that we'd have to explore working elsewhere.  
    
    Now consider for a moment how you might feel having to deliver such
    a message - imagine you're in business for yourself with several
    employees and you, as CEO, decide that your business must take
    a new direction and/or make some changes.  How would *you* deliver
    such a message so that it was "acceptable" to your employees?  
    
    If you've gone to a few DME courses, you'd realize that some/many
    will not like the message and will want to resist, so the key
    is to help bring employees to a place where they won't be so
    resistant.  The DEC mgt. education courses will have taught you
    that you'd better be listening carefully to how your people *feel*
    and what the motives are that drive such feelings.  
    
    These courses focus on how to get employees in touch with the 
    business objectives and how to help them look at what these mean to 
    their futures.  It can be viewed as a process of helping folks see 
    how the individual's success tied to the success of the company (and 
    vice versa).  In the early days of DEC this was easy; as we've grown,
    it's become more difficult for many to see.
    
    In my case, the manager was "good" - was able to help me "connect
    the dots".  He was "tough" when he had to be (to get me to stop 
    my tree-hugging) - at one point he challenged me to solve the problem 
    and would *not* let me get away with "Hey, that's not *my* problem. . .
    *you're* the manager".  It was at about that time that I began to 
    see more than I had as "just" an employee and, faced with *our common*
    business problem, I had no answers.  Fortunately, because he'd paid
    attention at DME, he did.  The compromise we reached was that I'd
    do the planning work for a specified time.  If by that time, the
    business' objectives were still such that I couldn't return to systems
    work, I'd be allowed a reasonable amount of time to look for a job
    in other groups.  
    
    As it turned out, the assignment (for which I receieve lots of kudos) 
    was finished in a quarter of the allotted time, and, on the other end, 
    I realized that my manager had helped me in ways I hadn't even
    imagined.  My value as an employee rose by factors of magnitude
    both in my own eyes and that of my peers and superiors - I now saw
    the value of viewing myself as a multi-skilled team player, one
    who could turn on a dime and play a different role than yesterday.
    
    To point number five, I'd respond that the notion that a desire
    for "power" is not the primary motivator for "most" managers.
    I'd counter that, from my experience, the primary motivators
    are the same as for "most" people - the desire to provide a
    comfortable living for their families and themselves and the
    desire to progress.  To the idea that managers like giving and
    receiving orders "regardless of logic and or morality/ethics"
    is false to the point of blindness.  It sounds like the kind
    of remark I made before I actually talked to and got to know
    any managers.  But don't just take my word for it, go to
    any manager and (without making him/her feel "on the hook")
    ask if they've ever had to carry out orders that they felt
    were unreasonable and how they felt about it.  I feel pretty
    certain you'll begin to hear a whole new kind of pain - the 
    pain of one who, upon receiving an "illogical" order pushes
    back (sometimes with severe risks to career), gets hammered
    by the higher ups, then has to implement the order knowing
    that her/his people will blame him/her.  Care to walk a mile
    in those moccasins?
    
    And I'd like to hear of examples of a manager who's given orders 
    that were illogical, immoral, or unethical.  Before you give the 
    example, however, make sure that you present the manager's reasons 
    for the orders (in her/his quoted words, not the listener's guesses
    about why the orders were given).  I'm again certain that you'll
    begin to hear that the manager had reasons that he/she felt were
    logical, moral, and/or ethical.  One could, of course, disagree
    with the logic or ethics, but that's another discussion.  The point
    here is that managers will not generally give orders they feel
    are "bad".  (NB:  sometimes the "logic" is no more profound than
    "If we don't do ___, we're history").
    
    In terms of promotions, managers will, almost invariaby, promote
    the people who help them succeed/look "good".  Again, it's a
    self-interest situation - one of the most common themes in
    management education is that a manager's success rests largely
    upon the success of the manager's people.  If I help my manager
    achieve his/her goals, I'm a more valuable resource than the
    individual who resists.  
    
    Finally, I'd suggest that a good deal of observation and experience
    tells me that the gap between management and employees is most 
    frequently due to what might be called tunnel-vision: as a planner,
    I was "certain" about what were the "right" ways to do things. 
    My opinions were, however, based on the picture of "business" I
    had as a planner.  As I became a senior planner, I realized that
    my picture of "reality" was somewhat limited.  Guess what I
    discovered when I became an analyst?  It was about that time that
    I decided to make the assumption that what I was seeing at my
    level (whatever that was), was a somewhat smaller picture than
    that of the next higher level.  And further, as I saw more of
    the "big picture", management decisions that had seemed "wrong"
    before, started to make a lot more sense.
    
    Steve
    
    P.S.  No, I'm not a manager; I've had to perform supervisory and
    	  management tasks, but have declined the mgt. career path.
    
    
      �  5. most people who want to be managers in the first place
  �  are the type of people who LIKE power! who like giving orders
  �  and who enjoy following the orders of their superiors regardless
  �  of logic and or morality/ethics. This type of manager tends
  �  to promote other people like her/him which perpetuates the
  �  lack of moral/ethical reasoning in management and widens (or
  �  strengthens) the gap between employees and managers.
  
 |