Managing by models.

THE MODELS ARE MULTIPLE

What constrains the performance of the organization is not so much the operational models, or the business models, but the management models as such.

WE OFTEN DO IN THE "SOUP OF THE DAY"

The gurus, in organizational theory, propose tons of new models for reconfiguring operations, repositioning the offer, and reforming operations. As a result, the leaders of our organizations are constantly moving from one management mode, method, and practice to another. At first glance, there is often a profound misunderstanding of the subjects addressed by the takers to the proposals put forward by the gurus of the moment, when in fact there is no gross incompetence in the mastery of the concepts advocated by the gurus who formulate them. Then there is a frenzy of performance, blamed on the concepts proposed, with no need to go through the test of time or to adapt to the specificity of the organizations adopting the proposals made. It's a soup of the day. Once the new models have been imported (theory), we move on to current affairs (practice). As if the "addiction to proposals" of a revealed guru had an automatic and operative effect of positive transformation on the organization's result, in the sense that the benefits declined in abstracto by the fortune teller concerned (the guru behind the proposal retained by the organization).

IS THE ENGINE WORTH THE TRANSMISSION, AND THE GAS PEDAL WORTH THE STEERING WHEEL?

The organization's managers do not sufficiently distinguish between result targets (short-term objectives: three months to one year), action plans (implementation programs: one year), positioning strategies (competitive targets in the reference market: one to two years), business goals (fundamental aspirations: three to five years), and industry forecasts (business behaviors: three to ten years). Everything blends, as if the engine were worth the transmission, or the gas pedal of the steering wheel. For them, it's all about driving, the driver's choice. However, the car, like the route and the fuel, counts just as much as the driver of the "organization's carriage". Nothing can be taken for granted; everything must be included in the management of the organization's business and affairs.

THE END IS OFTEN WANTED WITHOUT THE APPROPRIATE MEANS

The pace at which new organizational models are arriving on the market of ideas tends to institute, in the conduct of activity and business, an unthinking sense of urgency towards an all-or-nothing change in the modes, methods, and practices of management of the latter. However, we are not witnessing a progression of organizations toward increased performance, but a progression of organizations toward a loss of capacities, potentialities, and opportunities to innovate. We want the end, without the appropriate means, which supposes that the means chosen are inappropriate for the end being pursued. And "their" end is absolute profit, while the means are the minimum expenditure. Yet everyone knows that innovation, which involves research and development, costs more than it brings in the short term, and brings in more than it costs in the long term. Rather than changing their model, some organizations should think about changing their management first! There is a Portuguese proverb (often attributed to Mao Ze Dong) that says that "the fish rots first from the head"! Got it?