- Malik, a European management authority, is good at putting forward management views in objective ways such as cybernetics, systems theory, structure and tables. Very different from the American style, which is good at motivating, linear thinking.
- Malik’s viewpoints include: the characteristics of managers do not affect management effectiveness, companies do not have to focus on happiness, reduce the number of meetings, distinguish between operations and strategies, do not treat management as psychology, change in limited time and limited space form a consensus.
Recently, I deeply read the Swiss management scholar Freimond. Works by Fredmund Malik. This management scholar, who is good at managing complex systems, specializes in cybernetics and systems theory to study the path of change. His publications in Taiwan include “The Essence of Management” and “Effective Management in the New Era”. Different from the common American management school in Taiwan, Master Malik can always put forward some unique but reasonable views.
Taiwan’s books are really not enough to read, so I ordered six more management classics from Malik from China, including “Strategy”, “Management”, “Corporate Strategy and Corporate Governance” (all in Simplified Chinese translations) and so on. I deeply feel that the American way of thinking that we are accustomed to, and the European way of management are really different. I have sorted out a few points of view, which are considered to be proposing multiple ideas, and there may be an opportunity to become a point of reflection for you.
- The ideal manager has nothing to do with traits, what matters is “responsibility”
Malik mentioned that the ideal manager is hard to find common traits, the focus is on action.
l Consciously restrain yourself
l Careful and careful implementation
l Appropriate use of tools
The core key to this is “responsibility”. A good manager will have a strong sense of responsibility. This is a manifestation of ethics, not just obeying orders, and it will not be an occasional act when the mood comes.
“Responsibility” is derived from “self-discipline”. Aiming at the promises made by oneself, implement them in a disciplined and regular manner without excuses or reasons.
- Enterprises do not have to be happy enterprises, they should focus on effective output
Malik emphasized that companies’ over-focus on being a happy company can make employees think that their unhappiness and unhappiness are both the company’s problems. Therefore, a sense of dependence on the enterprise arises, and the motivation to create happiness is lost.
A truly mature manager should learn to motivate himself to work, but he should not over-interpret this as “manager’s business”. Facts have proved that employees will generate high work motivation, mainly from the specific output, which brings a sense of achievement or recognition.
- Reduce the number of meetings, the best number of meetings is “zero”
Fewer meetings, preferably no meetings. Every time I have the idea of a meeting, I have to think about “Is it possible not to have a meeting?”, “What is the purpose of this meeting?”
- Clearly distinguish what is “operation” and what is “strategy”
In a limited time, managers should pay attention to: don’t get caught up in the trivial matters related to daily operations, clearly distinguish what is “day-to-day operations”, and at the same time realize the most important thing for managers – strategic plans with strategic value painting. The latter means that it can have an absolute impact on the company’s future profits, especially the competitive advantage that managers need to focus on.
- Management is not psychology
More and more people link management and psychology, and use psychological terms to define management status and employee problems. Just as we use Adler psychology to over-explain low-performing employees, and use broken windows theory to discuss team cooperation. Such a deviation will make managers mistakenly think that managing people is to use psychology, and psychological techniques can be used to target individuals and defeat them individually.
Malik mentioned that the focus of management is “operations”. Management is a system, a set of knowledge, and a transferable skill. Your family of origin and your childhood experience will not affect your management. Management can have styles, but management skills are all the same and can be deliberately learned.
- Changes need to form a consensus within a limited time and limited space
Malik proposes the formula for “co-integration of change”:
1/40/3/12/40 > C,M,S,D = Syntegration
This formula represents: 1 most complex challenge with 40 key people, 40 key practices for 12 most important sub-issues in 3 days. Thereby completing creative solutions (C), reaching maximum consensus (M), boosting the will to change (S), and igniting the desire to execute (D).
The key to this formula is that decisions related to change “must be completed within 3 days.” Therefore, the 40 participants worked together under time pressure and on the premise of reaching a conclusion. Another key is to “use a common tool”, so that the 40 key practices can become a conclusion and a consensus in a common language. Because of “co-working + consensus”, changes can be made rhythmic, but flexible.
These books by Swiss management scholar Malik were initially recommended by the chairman of iST Technology. Malik is different from the American style, which is good at motivating and linear thinking. The mainstream scholar of the European management school is good at putting forward another management point of view through the observation of the long history through relatively objective methods such as structure and table.
To read is to talk to the author and offer your own opinion. Reading is for refinement, depth, and reflection. Habitual thinking will not always be habitual thinking. That’s what it means to read.
