eir people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than con

I am not interested in a theory of management. I am interested in the practice of management. I am interested in having managers fulfill their purpose. And their purpose is that the jobs get done more and more effectively with them there than without them there.

That needs to begin with an honest look at how we are as managers.

The Distinction ‘Most-Manager’

There is a class of management….equivalent, say, to 2nd and 1st lieutenants. They have no real management authority. They often cannot even make recommendations.

They may have supervisors report to them (or even very low level managers). They have between 8 and 40 people directly and indirectly below them. They may have their own administrative assistant, though usually the administrative assistant is shared.

This is the critical one: They are almost always promoted from the ranks. If not, that is their genealogy. They receive no management training… Or, if they do, it has virtually nothing to do with their jobs. I say this is so for most managers…and so I class this class of management ‘most-management’.

Most-managers don’t have MBA’s, don’t know anything about business; have read virtually nothing of management.

Promotions are all of the battlefield variety…They learn by imitation of those who learn by imitation of those who…This field promotion strategy perpetuates all that doesn’t work.

Most-managers are powerless. They are never even told the limits or scope of their accountability and authority. There is no break-in; there is no planning period. And the scope of their authority is nearly non-existent (who trusts a 2nd lieutenant? (if they're lucky, their sargeants run everything)). They have little or no administrative responsibility or support. They can request to purchase equipment and to hire personnel, but are then told yes or no. They may get to say who to hire (unless the salary will be too large); they do get to review their people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than cont

ty. They often cannot even make recommendations.

They may have supervisors report to them (or even very low level managers). They have between 8 and 40 people directly and indirectly below them. They may have their own administrative assistant, though usually the administrative assistant is shared.

This is the critical one: They are almost always promoted from the ranks. If not, that is their genealogy. They receive no management training… Or, if they do, it has virtually nothing to do with their jobs. I say this is so for most managers…and so I class this class of management ‘most-management’.

Most-managers don’t have MBA’s, don’t know anything about business; have read virtually nothing of management.

Promotions are all of the battlefield variety…They learn by imitation of those who learn by imitation of those who…This field promotion strategy perpetuates all that doesn’t work.

Most-managers are powerless. They are never even told the limits or scope of their accountability and authority. There is no break-in; there is no planning period. And the scope of their authority is nearly non-existent (who trusts a 2nd lieutenant? (if they're lucky, their sargeants run everything)). They have little or no administrative responsibility or support. They can request to purchase equipment and to hire personnel, but are then told yes or no. They may get to say who to hire (unless the salary will be too large); they do get to review their people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than con

thing to do with their jobs. I say this is so for most managers…and so I class this class of management ‘most-management’.

Most-managers don’t have MBA’s, don’t know anything about business; have read virtually nothing of management.

Promotions are all of the battlefield variety…They learn by imitation of those who learn by imitation of those who…This field promotion strategy perpetuates all that doesn’t work.

Most-managers are powerless. They are never even told the limits or scope of their accountability and authority. There is no break-in; there is no planning period. And the scope of their authority is nearly non-existent (who trusts a 2nd lieutenant? (if they're lucky, their sargeants run everything)). They have little or no administrative responsibility or support. They can request to purchase equipment and to hire personnel, but are then told yes or no. They may get to say who to hire (unless the salary will be too large); they do get to review their people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than con

s or scope of their accountability and authority. There is no break-in; there is no planning period. And the scope of their authority is nearly non-existent (who trusts a 2nd lieutenant? (if they're lucky, their sargeants run everything)). They have little or no administrative responsibility or support. They can request to purchase equipment and to hire personnel, but are then told yes or no. They may get to say who to hire (unless the salary will be too large); they do get to review their people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than con

eir people and recommend salary action (but can’t begin to guarantee it). They can recommend dismissals and are usually backed up – but must discuss it first.

They may get to prepare a budget – but it’s an exercise (and they don’t get to work against it anyhow).

They often have no idea of the purpose of their job, certainly not the real purpose – and are focused on short-term objectives. They may get to participate in planning cycles, but have little ability to do more than continue what exists.

Waht's your experience been?