Hospital and Health Care Finance

Farson, Richard. Management of the Absurd. With a forward by Michael Crichton. New York, 1997.

In his book, provocatively entitled Management of the Absurd, the author Richard Farson attempts to demonstrate that management is often a deceptively simple science, despite attempts by other business gurus of leadership to state otherwise and render the meaning of leadership into complex formulas and intricately worded principles. Intriguingly, Farson structures his book upon what he defines as paradoxes of leadership that are present within any organization, dealing with emotional rather than rational aspects of organizational behavior.

Some of these insights take the form of slogans, such as "the more we communicate, the less we communicate." By this, Farson means that quite often, the more an organization is structured to lead by formulized talking, through a constant resorting to the protocol of committee meetings and the re-hearing of differences, the less gets done in actual, practical terms. Rather than effective managers constantly policing employees through the use of red tape and bureaucracy, effective managers delegate authority with an ear and an eye to human differences, rather than human standardization. This embracing of paradox is perhaps best found in Farson's recommendation that "once you find a management technique that works, give it up." There is no 'technique' for Farson, rather there is only the situational understanding of paradoxes inherent within any management structure and the individuals that make up that structure.

Farson's advice is particularly apt in human-related industries such as health care, which depend upon serving individuals with complex and often paradoxical needs. However, any organizational structure that has a great deal of incomprehensible red tape to its nature can benefit from Farson's analysis. Farson observes human beings under the absurd stresses of human life, and takes a warm and droll eye of human foibles and irrationality in the face of life and laws. He urges readers to take a radically different, non-standardized perspective on leadership to tackle organizational problems. In some ways this may seem like stating the obvious. He stresses the intuitive need to listen to one's judgment of one's colleagues and underlings, rather than obeying precepts. But in the face of the increasing standardization of the protocols of most office workplaces, it is an important reminder of the necessity for trusting one's own judgment and appreciating paradox and absurdity in the human and also the managerial condition.