Hello Ed:
>The use of certain tools, theories, techniques, systems, etc. in managing and/ or running organizations is an entirely the prerogative of individual managers.<
But it should not be up to the individual manager to pick and choose the tools they use. Organizations that allow individual managers to make such decisions also allow each manager to put the assets of the organization at great risk.
>The perception of whether they are good, bad, effective, or ineffective is subjective to the individuals concerned.<
Again, individual managers are all too often ill-prepared and unable to evaluate the effectiveness of their own behavior.
>Some things that others may consider good or effective may not be to you.<
Then the manager should find another employer.
>In the absence of an internationally accepted standard or matrix, whom can we believe as having the better perspective and judgment.<
The manager's boss and the boss' boss.
>I don's agree with your perception that the Bell Curve is very easy to understand and that it can be done fast.<
It need not be understood to be used. PCs can do the work so it is easy to use.
>... they implemented the Bell Curve as a performance tool that they really determined the exact quantities of performers per rating according to the prescribed quantities or percentages assigned by their management.<
That may be but we don't need to use a Bell Curve to be an effective manager.
>I am not a supporter nor an advocate of the Bell Curve and Forced Ranking.<
That surprises me.
>What I said is simply my explanation of how I understood its usefulness to organizations after many years of implementing it in one of the companies that I worked for before.<
If it is useful, then you should advocate its use unless you have better methods and tools.
>Supervisors and Managers are expected to do their jobs daily. Their day to day jobs is to supervise and manage people. And managing includes teaching, coaching, and implementing corrective or disciplinary action when warranted.<
I agree.
>Periodic and/ or annual appraisals...<
I agree I just don't think Bell Curves help managers manage.
>I think you should understand the Bell Curve from the point of view of business owners.<
Many business owners and their managers do things that counterproductive but that doesn't mean I have to agree or even overlook what they do.
>When you do, then you will gladly show the curve to every employee that will complain why they did not get their expected promotion and/ or cash reward.<
Does that help the employee to work more effectively?
>Those who use the Bell Curve in such a manner that ratings are changed as a consequence of the forced ranking, they deserve to be told and be made to understand the entire process. Otherwise, those who were shown their initial high ratings by their immediate supervisor will curse and accuse their supervisors of lying if they will not be promoted and given cash rewards for the ratings they initially saw.<
That is a sure sign that the managers are incompetent.
>You have a unique way of seeing and understanding things differently in organizational environments. You are incorrect but entitled to your own negative views.<
Do you blame the employees?
Who hires employees?
Who assigns employees to their jobs?
Who decides if employees stay on the job?
Who decides what training employees receive?
Who is responsible for effectively managing employees?
The answer to all these questions is the employee's employer through its managers.
>The Bell Curve is the "normal distribution curve" in statistics.<
An employer that has its employees performing their jobs in a normal distribution should ask themselves why that is true.
>That's why it is able to camouflage its real motives.<
Yes, it camouflages the real motives of managers---to avoid doing the hard work of managing.
>You must study logic to improve your perception and understanding of things around you.<
I have studied logic, statistics, and management and I disagree with using the Bell Curve as a substitute for managing.
>Things are not necessarily wrong when they don't fit your mindset and/ or agree with your ways of looking at things.<
That is so true but then again it doesn't make you wrong either.
>Your real exposure must have been in very small organizations whose employees do not reach thousands.<
No supervisor should supervise more people than they can effectively manage so your observation is unhelpful.
>There is a popular maxim in capitalist societies that runs this way: HE WHO HAS THE GOLD RULES! <
I agree but does that mean we have to agree with them even when they do dumb things?
>I said that many organizations are managed using the principle of "operational convenience" or "expediency".<
I agree, managers do what is easy for them and they don't care too much about the effectiveness until the boss gets on their back about the ineffectiveness.
>Hired **** in organizations are simply implementors of the business owners.<
As outside observers we should tell the emperor he has no clothes when he is naked. Internal observers need to be very careful however.
>You are FREE to implement the mandates of the shareholders.<
Yes, even when the mandates are counterproductive I might add.
>Otherwise,you have to get out and create your own organization and manage it the way you want it. But for as long as you are employed, your only option ti to follow the rule!<
We agree on that.
My advice to managers and wannabe managers is to get a formal education in management so that you don't learn the wrong things from your managers.
Thanks again for an interesting reply.
Bob Gately
[Login to view]
>The use of certain tools, theories, techniques, systems, etc. in managing and/ or running organizations is an entirely the prerogative of individual managers.<
But it should not be up to the individual manager to pick and choose the tools they use. Organizations that allow individual managers to make such decisions also allow each manager to put the assets of the organization at great risk.
>The perception of whether they are good, bad, effective, or ineffective is subjective to the individuals concerned.<
Again, individual managers are all too often ill-prepared and unable to evaluate the effectiveness of their own behavior.
>Some things that others may consider good or effective may not be to you.<
Then the manager should find another employer.
>In the absence of an internationally accepted standard or matrix, whom can we believe as having the better perspective and judgment.<
The manager's boss and the boss' boss.
>I don's agree with your perception that the Bell Curve is very easy to understand and that it can be done fast.<
It need not be understood to be used. PCs can do the work so it is easy to use.
>... they implemented the Bell Curve as a performance tool that they really determined the exact quantities of performers per rating according to the prescribed quantities or percentages assigned by their management.<
That may be but we don't need to use a Bell Curve to be an effective manager.
>I am not a supporter nor an advocate of the Bell Curve and Forced Ranking.<
That surprises me.
>What I said is simply my explanation of how I understood its usefulness to organizations after many years of implementing it in one of the companies that I worked for before.<
If it is useful, then you should advocate its use unless you have better methods and tools.
>Supervisors and Managers are expected to do their jobs daily. Their day to day jobs is to supervise and manage people. And managing includes teaching, coaching, and implementing corrective or disciplinary action when warranted.<
I agree.
>Periodic and/ or annual appraisals...<
I agree I just don't think Bell Curves help managers manage.
>I think you should understand the Bell Curve from the point of view of business owners.<
Many business owners and their managers do things that counterproductive but that doesn't mean I have to agree or even overlook what they do.
>When you do, then you will gladly show the curve to every employee that will complain why they did not get their expected promotion and/ or cash reward.<
Does that help the employee to work more effectively?
>Those who use the Bell Curve in such a manner that ratings are changed as a consequence of the forced ranking, they deserve to be told and be made to understand the entire process. Otherwise, those who were shown their initial high ratings by their immediate supervisor will curse and accuse their supervisors of lying if they will not be promoted and given cash rewards for the ratings they initially saw.<
That is a sure sign that the managers are incompetent.
>You have a unique way of seeing and understanding things differently in organizational environments. You are incorrect but entitled to your own negative views.<
Do you blame the employees?
Who hires employees?
Who assigns employees to their jobs?
Who decides if employees stay on the job?
Who decides what training employees receive?
Who is responsible for effectively managing employees?
The answer to all these questions is the employee's employer through its managers.
>The Bell Curve is the "normal distribution curve" in statistics.<
An employer that has its employees performing their jobs in a normal distribution should ask themselves why that is true.
>That's why it is able to camouflage its real motives.<
Yes, it camouflages the real motives of managers---to avoid doing the hard work of managing.
>You must study logic to improve your perception and understanding of things around you.<
I have studied logic, statistics, and management and I disagree with using the Bell Curve as a substitute for managing.
>Things are not necessarily wrong when they don't fit your mindset and/ or agree with your ways of looking at things.<
That is so true but then again it doesn't make you wrong either.
>Your real exposure must have been in very small organizations whose employees do not reach thousands.<
No supervisor should supervise more people than they can effectively manage so your observation is unhelpful.
>There is a popular maxim in capitalist societies that runs this way: HE WHO HAS THE GOLD RULES! <
I agree but does that mean we have to agree with them even when they do dumb things?
>I said that many organizations are managed using the principle of "operational convenience" or "expediency".<
I agree, managers do what is easy for them and they don't care too much about the effectiveness until the boss gets on their back about the ineffectiveness.
>Hired **** in organizations are simply implementors of the business owners.<
As outside observers we should tell the emperor he has no clothes when he is naked. Internal observers need to be very careful however.
>You are FREE to implement the mandates of the shareholders.<
Yes, even when the mandates are counterproductive I might add.
>Otherwise,you have to get out and create your own organization and manage it the way you want it. But for as long as you are employed, your only option ti to follow the rule!<
We agree on that.
My advice to managers and wannabe managers is to get a formal education in management so that you don't learn the wrong things from your managers.
Thanks again for an interesting reply.
Bob Gately
[Login to view]