EDITORIAL FEATURE
Management Styles.
Corporate Cultures Reflect
Business Progress and Growth.
By Hank Moore Corporate Strategist™
O
rganizations should coordinate management skills into its overall corporate
strategy, in order to satisfy customer
needs profitably, draw together the components for practical strategies and implement
strategic requirements to impact the business.
This is my review of how management styles
have evolved.
In the period that predated scientific management, the Captain of Industry style prevailed. Prior to 1885, the kings of industry
were rulers, as had been land barons of earlier years. Policies were dictated, and people
complied. Some captains were notoriously
ruthless. Others like Rockefeller, Carnegie
and Ford channeled their wealth and power
into giving back to the communities. It was
an era of self-made millionaires and the people who toiled in their mills.
From 1885-1910, the labor movement gathered steam. Negotiations and collective bargaining focused on conditions for workers and
physical plant environments. In this era, business fully segued from an agricultural-based
economy to an industrial-based reality.
As a reaction to industrial reforms and the
strength of unions, a Hard Nosed style of leadership was prominent from 1910-1939, management’s attempt to take stronger hands, recapture some of the Captain of Industry style
and build solidity into an economy plagued by
the Depression. This is an important phase to
remember because it is the mindset of addictive organizations.
The Human Relations style of management
flourished from 1940-1964. Under it, people
were managed. Processes were managed as
collections of people. Employees began hav-
16 SMALL BUSINESS TODAY MAGAZINE [ SEPTEMBER 2015 ]
From 1885-1910, the labor movement
gathered steam. Negotiations and
collective bargaining focused on
conditions for workers and physical plant
environments. In this era, business
fully segued from an agricultural-based
economy to an industrial-based
reality.
ing greater says in the execution of policies.
Yet, the rank and file employees at this point
were not involved in creating policies, least of
all strategies and methodologies.
Management by Objectives came into
vogue in 1965 and was the prevailing leadership style until 1990. In this era, business
started embracing formal planning. Other
important components of business (training,
marketing, research, team building and productivity) were all accomplished according to
goals, objectives and tactics.
Most corporate leaders are two management styles behind. Those who matured in
the era of the Human Relations style of management were still clinging to value systems of
Hard Nosed. They were not just “old school.”
They went to the school that was torn down
to build the old school.
Executives who were educated in the Management by Objectives era were still recalling
value systems of their parents’ generation before it. Baby boomers with a Depression-era
frugality and value of tight resources are more
likely to take a bean counter-focused approach to business. That’s my concern that
financial-only focus without regard to other
corporate dynamics bespeaks of hostile take-