Gary Hamel's moon shots for modern management practices

Management Moon Shots

Shooting the Moon in Management: Methods for Achieving Organizational and Managerial Excellence

Management theory has only been in conscious development for a century or so in the modern sense; though managers and management theories certainly predate the time of Henry Ford and the concepts of controlled efficiency and organization, but it was during the industrialization of the early twentieth century that management really became a filed of study and practical endeavor (Hamel 2009). Since that time, many different theories, some with very different assumptions and precepts at their core, have been advanced and implemented in attempts to perfect management and encourage the greatest possible levels of motivation, efficiency, and satisfaction in organizations. A good number of these theories have eventually been left by the wayside as ineffectual, but a great deal of useful knowledge has emerged from the many practical managerial experiments.

In his article "Moon Shots for Management," Gary Hamel provides a succinct yet detailed list about some of the best managerial practices to emerge from the many different managerial theories, and that prove especially effective in the fast-paced and increasingly fragmented yet unified network that is business in the digital age. An examination of just two of the management recommendations that Hamel lists in this article provides ample evidence of their effectiveness in the practical world. These suggestions may initially seem simplistic and even obvious, but a detailed glance at their theoretical application reveals that these techniques are both more difficult and more profound than they seem.

Depoliticizing Decision Making

Another effective management tool that runs counter to many traditional models but is highly effective in modern organizations is the depoliticization of decision making. Again, this might seem like simple good sense; making decisions based on the factual merits of the situation rather than on face-saving or boss-pleasing seems like the only rational way of doing business. Not paying attention to political whims, however, can have serious repercussions for individuals and organizations alike, and truly depoliticizing decisions requires a great deal of introspection, honesty, and self-awareness in the top management officials and decision makers in a company (Hamel 2009).

Achieving this depoliticization is certain to be even more difficult than establishing a democracy of information, as it is difficult to convince people to relinquish power willingly once they have it. The problem is that politicized decision making is only a hair's breadth away -- one might even say is simply a euphemism for -- corrupt decision making. Few debates or issues are more heavily politicized than long-term (and even short-term) government planning, and though government entities are run very differently from businesses in many regards, in this area they are remarkably similar. The politicization of governmental decision making ceases to have the best interests of the citizens that government is beholden to at heart, and instead shifts the focus to the benefit of certain political factions, or even to certain individuals within the government (Newman 2009).

Just so, the politicization of decision making in business is generally self-serving, if not economically than through a sense of pride or, as Hamel puts it, hubris. It does not take into account what is best for the company, its employees, or its shareholders, but rather serves the interests of the decision makers themselves. More effective decision making for the business requires that these officials, either in the company of in the government, give ground and let the larger population become involved in the decision making process (Newman 2009; Hamel 2009). Not only does this ensure that the people who will be affected by decisions that are made have a say in the matter, but it also provides for a much broader and often more accurate knowledge base form which these decisions can be made. Depoliticizing means equalizing, and this is greatly aided by a democracy of information.

Conclusion

The two concepts of the depoliticization of decision making and creating a democracy of information go hand in hand, and work best if used in tandem with each other. The ability to make effective and apolitical decisions depends upon the accuracy and breadth of information available; without a democracy of information, a depoliticized decision making process is essentially useless. Conversely, a democracy of information cannot be put to use without a more inclusive and less biased decision making process; there is no point in knowing something that enables more effective action if that action cannot be taken. Again, this statement seems like common sense, but in managerial situations things often seem -- and are -- more complicated. Adhering to these principles can be difficult, but the payoff for creating an organization that works according to the principles of democratic information and depoliticized decision making is an effective and flexible organization.

There are many other suggestions that Hamel makes in "Moon Shots for Management" that would be equally effective, and that would create environments that worked well with the concepts of depoliticization and democracy. These two managerial strategies, however, are among the most essential changes any organization hoping to remain viable in the twenty-first century can make. With them, there is flexibility and the potential for fast and effective growth. Without them, there is only a rigid hierarchy destined for stagnation.