American vs Japanese Management ...

A Japanese company and an American company decided to have a canoe race 
in the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach 
their peak performance before the race. On the big day the Japanese won by a mile.

Afterward, the American team became discouraged and depressed. American
management decided the reason for the crushing defeat had to be found.
A management team made up of senior managers was formed to investigate 
and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 
eight people rowing and one person steering, while the American team 
had eight people steering and one person rowing. So American management 
hired a consulting company and paid them an incredible sum. After six 
months, they advised that too many people were steering the boat, while 
not enough people were rowing. To prevent losing to the Japanese again 
next year, the rowing team's management structure was totally 
reorganized to four steering supervisors, three area-steering 
superintendents and one assistant-superintendent steering manager.

They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 
person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called 
the "Rowing Team Quality First Program," with meetings, dinners and 
free pens for the rower. Even new paddles and medical-benefit 
incentives were promised for a winner. "We must give the rower the 
empowerment and enrichments through this quality program."

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rowers for poor 
performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles and 
canceled all capital investments for new equipment.

The money saved was distributed to the senior executives as bonuses for 
a job well done. 

 

Management: The Bozo Definition

from peopleware, Tom DeMarco:

Management is a complex enough thing to defy simple definition, but that nuance was lost on one senior manager we encountered at a professional society meeting in London. He summed up his entire view of the subject with this statement: "Management is kicking ass."

This equates to the view that managers provide all the thinking and the people underneath them just carry out their bidding. Again, that might be workable for cheeseburger production, but not for any effort for which people do the work with their heads rather than their hands. Everyone in such an environment has got to have the brain in gear. You may be able to kick people to make them active, but not to make them creative, inventive, and thoughtful.

Even if kicking people in the backside did boost their short-term productivity, it might not be useful in the long run: There is nothing more discouraging to any worker than the sense that his own motivation is inadequate and has to be "supplemented" by that of the boss.

The saddest thing about this management approach is that it's almost always superfluous. You seldom need to take Draconian measures to keep your people working; most of them love their work. You may even have to take steps sometimes to make them work less, and thus get more meaningful work done.