Fad Management

I'm sure you know about fad diets, fad exercises and fad clothing — but what about fad management? Management is very fad conscious. If you don’t believe me, just look at your own organization and ask yourself how many quality, safety or improvement programs have been implemented in the past five years? How many of those are still around? Some stick around painfully for many years — kind of like disco music — but they don’t have the staying power. (I have to admit, a few disco songs will linger but most will not.)

What’s a fad?

There are many definitions but the one word they all have common is “temporary.” We can’t say that any process or program that didn’t last was a fad because there may have been some validity to the process and program; it just didn’t have the focus, power or support to catch on at the organization. In other words, it wasn’t imprinted into the culture. It didn’t fit. Some of the fad management styles are really just reformations or improvements of older processes that are dusted off, polished and given another label such as “lean.”

There was brief enthusiasm for Genghis Khan’s and Julius Caesar’s management styles. In practice, these war tactics resembled the management styles of Madeline Kahn and Sid Caesar. These were brutal, blood-thirsty leaders that would kill, maim and rape men, women and children. Is this what you really want to emulate as a management style?

I have been reading about revolutionary management. According to the rules of revolutionary management, if there really are any, as with any revolution you seize three key areas: communication, education and police/military. If you really followed the revolutionary way of doing things, you would first gain control of the police/military and force control and in rapid succession reeducate (brainwash) the general population, stop all free and open communication (TV, radio and newspapers), then eliminate the academics as they tend to think freely too much. You don’t want people to think on their own; you only want them to think what they are told to think. That harsh reality of revolution is obviously not what is promoted by this “new” managerial tactic.

The concept of correlation

As with many fads, it is an old tactic with a new name so upper management thinks its on the frontline of cutting-edge techniques. Upper management is like the kid in the candy store, “I want that. No that’s fancier, I want that instead.” They see where something worked in another organization and they want it. “Flying-High Airline’s aircraft mechanics all wear pink coveralls and they have an outstanding maintenance program and safety record, so let’s all start wearing pink coveralls.” I have found that the concept of correlation is lost on upper management or for that matter, management in general. They are not the only group to fall victim to thinking that correlation is synonymous with cause and effect. The medical community is notorious for this same mishap.

The incidence of autism in the United States is one in 150 children, according to published CDC reports. This is a dramatic increase from the end of the 1970s, when the ratio of autism in our society was one in 10,000, before the cell phone, wireless and similar technologies that produce radio waves were introduced into the environment. Other things have also increased from the 1970s, so are they also a cause? Could it be that we have improved our ability to detect autism at early stages — so is it cause and effect, or we just got better at diagnosis?

Archeologists in Los Angeles dug down 100 feet and found wire, then concluded by debris depth that we had electricity 200 years ago. Anthropologists in San Francisco dug down 200 feet and found communication cable, then concluded by the debris depth that we had telephones 400 years ago. A farmer in Illinois dug down 300 feet and found nothing. Using the same logic as the scientists, he concluded that we went cellular 600 years ago.

Correlation is an interesting phenomenon that should spur further investigation to determine if there really is a cause-and-effect relationship, but in the meantime it is just a curiosity. The fact that 80 percent of hardened criminals were breastfed does not mean that breastfeeding leads to criminal activity. This is reverse correlation and we can all recognize that as a ridiculous assumption. However, when it comes to management and medicine, especially when it comes from reputable individuals, that practicality gets lost and opens the door to a consultant feeding frenzy. As W.C. Fields said, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

The fact that a revolution results in change does not automatically mean that change is the result of a revolution. Let’s look at this more closely. Most revolutions fail and destruction and death result in their wake. Revolutionaries are imprisoned, tortured and killed. In some revolutions, a third and more sinister party might be lying in wait to seize control as the two main parties battle it out and get weaker.

So much for dramatic reality. What is this “new” revolutionary management style? The three key areas are still a factor: communication, education and police/military, but these are most definitely controlled in different ways. Tell me if you think this is “new.”

Key Revolutionary Area #1

NEW:

Communication is opened up for dialogue with communication that flows up and sideways as well as down. Wow, how revolutionary is that? Now read this.

OLD:

1. Break down barriers between departments. People in research, design, sales and production must work as a team to foresee problems of production and in use that may be encountered with the product or service.

2. Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his or her right to pride of workmanship. The responsibility of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers to quality.

3. Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of their right to pride of workmanship. This means, inter alia, abolishment of the annual or merit rating and of management by objective (Deming, 1982).

Those are three of Deming’s 14 points for management. Similar sentiment and that book were published 30 years ago. To make it more interesting, those concepts were formulated by Deming 30 years before he published the book. It seems that what is old is new again.

Key Revolutionary Area #2

NEW:

Education is the second target of revolutionary management and it emphasizes to change what is being taught and teach the new way of doing things. Change their minds and their hearts will follow theory. Try this on for size.

OLD:

1. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age. Western management must awaken to the challenge, must learn its responsibilities, and take on leadership for change.

2. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service, to improve quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs.

3. Institute training on the job.

4. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement (Deming).

Oh boy, four more of Deming’s 14 points. The “new” is losing its shine, isn’t it?

Key Revolutionary Area #3

NEW:

Gain control of the police/military. What they are referring to in a business setting is the QC and QA functions. These are, or should, be key functions in any business. Let me add safety and regulatory compliance. Getting control of those functions and moving them from a reactive state to a proactive one should be the focus.

OLD:

1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business, and to provide jobs.

2. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for inspection on a mass basis by building quality into the product in the first place.

3. Institute leadership. The aim of supervision should be to help people and machines and gadgets to do a better job. Supervision of management is in need of overhaul, as well as supervision of production workers.

4. Eliminate workforce slogans, exhortations and targets that ask for zero defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belongs to the system and thus lies beyond the power of the work force.

Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute leadership.

Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by numbers and numerical goals. Substitute leadership (Deming).

With those four more of Deming’s 14 points, that newness shine should be completely dull by now.

I would be remiss if I didn’t give you Deming’s remaining three points:

1. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag. Instead, minimize total cost. Move toward a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust.

2. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.

3. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is everybody’s job (Deming).

Look at the last one. Isn’t that what we are really looking for? Get everyone on the same page, working toward the same goal and delivering quality and value to the customer. I am not advocating that you stick with the “old” ways and disregard the “new” stuff coming out. I am an advocate of Deming but I also understand that his 30-year-old published work which was developed 60 years ago could use some updating. Deming is more of a management philosopher whose teaching is generic and simple, which is why it has resilience and sustainability. Take all these new fads with a grain of salt and don’t swallow it hook, line and sinker. The fact that it offers a square peg and you have a square hole and a large hammer doesn’t mean it is going to fit. Always look at these as concepts, guides or suggestions. Your organization is unique and you need to study concepts, adapt them both organizationally and culturally, and adopt them to your unique organizational philosophy if they work.

Fads are fun and interesting but you will be better off when you take these “new” techniques and make your own personal technique.

As martial arts master Bruce Lee said, “Use only that which works, and take it from any place you can find it.”  

 

Deming, W. Edwards (1982). “Out of the Crisis,” MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Patrick Kinane joined the Air Force after high school and has worked in aviation since 1964. Kinane is a certified A&P with Inspection Authorization and also holds an FAA license and commercial pilot certificate with instrument rating. He earned a bacherlor of science degree in aviation maintenance management, MBA in quantitative methods, Master of Science degree in education and Ph.D. in organizational psychology. The majority of his aviation career has been involved with 121 carriers where he has held positions from aircraft mechanic to director of maintenance. Kinane currently works as Senior Quality Systems Auditor for AAR Corp. and adjunct professor for DeVry University instructing in organizational behavior, total quality management (TQM) and critical thinking. PlaneQA is his consulting company that specializes in quality and safety system audits and training. Speaking engagements are available with subjects in critical thinking, quality systems and organizational behavior. For more information, visit www.PlaneQA.com.

About D.O.M. Magazine

D.O.M. magazine is the premier magazine for aviation maintenance management professionals. Its management-focused editorial provides information maintenance managers need and want including business best practices, professional development, regulatory, quality management, legal issues and more. The digital version of D.O.M. magazine is available for free on all devices (iOS, Android, and Amazon Kindle).

Privacy Policy  |  Cookie Policy  |  GDPR Policy

More Info

Joe Escobar (jescobar@dommagazine.com)
Editorial Director
920-747-0195

Greg Napert (gnapert@dommagazine.com)
Publisher, Sales & Marketing
608-436-3376

Bob Graf (bgraf@dommagazine.com)
Director of Business, Sales & Marketing
608-774-4901