Friday
28Aug2009
Management 2.0
Friday, August 28, 2009 at 10:19AM There, I've said it. I've been avoiding using the phrase Management 2.0 because of the the nonsense that gets generated about Enterprise 2.0 and Web 2.0 but when I am asked what I do, or have to film in forms about my occupation, I nowadays just put "management consultancy".
People have always needed help on how to best run businesses taking into account the prevailing social and technological environments and that is all we are doing now. Not a movement, not a fad, not a revolution. Just the ongoing evolution of how to do stuff well given the tools currently at our disposal.
Reader Comments (8)
Fantastic Euan, that just made me laugh out loud. Hope you're well, Rachel.
I'm guessing that comment was meant to relate to the previous post!
Nice one Euan. When I was at a conference with a colleague from PwC we were talking about the need for managers 2.0. We weren't joking! Then we got on to talking about the need for biscuits 2.0 at the conference. We were joking then :-)
It was your reference to this post via Facebook that made me smile with the adjoining Tweets- it made me curious to see what you'd written, Rachel
Yes, it's a tricky one, Euan...the continuity / change continuum...so here's an anecdote / wee case study of an organisational experience...
When the international development charity, INASP (The International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications) came to the the end of PERI (its 3-year Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information), we were in discussions with funders about the continuation of the WORK but, if new funding was to be secured, we needed to mark a distinction between the previous PROGRAMME and the new one...yet, the PERI name had been so useful in developing countries - a much simpler way of naming what we do and because it's much easier to say than 'INASP' for those for whom English is not their mothertongue - that we were loathe to lose it. We also wanted to reference the way in which Web 2.0 was likely to permeate our work during the 'lifetime' of the next programme, but without over egging the net-evangelist pudding...
We're still delighted with the simplicity and ingeniousness of PERii ! (Sad, you might say, but a lot's in a name...) Orally and aurally, it's mostly still just called 'Perry', but sometimes 'Perry-two'...but always written as PERii...giving us continuity & change and signalling, in a light-touch way, its tool-harnessing, qualitatively different next steps... (and we secured the funds!)
It is worth taking time to think these steps through, I reckon...even for a trail-blazer like yourself...you really know then that you're making a lingustic change by informed choice and why you are doing so... for what it MEANS...rather than just jumping on a jargon band-wagon... It's the sort of thing that increases my respect for your professional judgement, rather than it seeming like heel-dragging on your part ...
All good wishes
Tag PS Thanks for 'Wonderful', too...it is !
Has everyone forgotten Drucker?
Has everyone forgotten Drucker?
No.
Hey Euan,
Why bother calling it 2.0 then? Surely, this indicates something that is designed to be qualitatively, not just quantitatively different.
You've got a much better fix on me on whether web 2.0 is different to 1.0 and I'm happy to go along with your view that it's not.
But there's got to be an opportunity for management 2.0. There's just too much evidence that current ways of managing just aren't working. Business is (or at least employees are) crying out for change. And there's an opportunity to get business leaders focused on a revolutionarily differently future.
2.0 makes sense for me, as I think it's the social piece (the difference between web 2.0 and 2.0 if there is one) that I think provides the basis for this.
Cheers, Jon.