Foundational Management: Peter Drucker’s Philosophy
Introduction
Peter Drucker was a foundational management philosopher who was hugely respected in the entire discipline of management. His management philosophies were based on decentralizing power and authority among all employees in an organization. Drucker’s philosophies are characterized by numerous differences as compared to other management philosophers. This is mainly because he emphasizes on the use of democratic approaches in any given management system.
According to his philosophies, management involves every employee within an organization or other corporate establishments. This approach helps in the pursuit of common objectives. This is because all stakeholders are moving towards the same direction. In this essay, foundational management philosophies of Peter Drucker shall be evaluated. Additionally, Drucker’s philosophies shall be compared with scientific and classic management theories.
Employees as Assets
Peter Drucker is renowned in the entire discipline of management for his assertion that employees are assets. This perspective forms a difference between his philosophies and the concepts outlined by Yaniv (2011) and Miller (2010). In their respective articles, the two authors have not perceived employees as organizational assets. While formulating this philosophy, Peter Drucker was aware of the huge demands of modern-day management. (Daft, 2009)
Furthermore, this foundational management philosopher was assertive that firms would be rendered redundant if they disrespect employees. Importantly, management systems that appreciate the role of employees are characterized by excellent levels of effectiveness. This is because such workers are dedicated towards the successful completion of tasks. Workers’ productivity cannot be enhanced without using appropriate mechanism of motivation. This perspective is also lacking in the management theories outlined by Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011).
In his philosophy, Peter Drucker outlines that high motivation levels result into excellent productivity among employees. Management systems that perceive employees as liabilities are highly ineffective. (Adetule, 2009)Such workers are not dedicated towards the successful completion of tasks. Both the classic and scientific management theories have also not provided the relevant framework for enhancing employees’ performance. In contrast, organizations have numerous alternatives according to Peter Drucker’s foundational management philosophy. Even though he formulated this philosophy in the mid-1950s, it is applicable in modern-day management. (Yaniv, 2011)
Substance over Style
Apart from considering employees as assets, Drucker’s management philosophy emphasizes substance over style. Essentially, this philosophy implies that managers should focus more towards performance. This presents a different perspective as compared to management theories provided by Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011). According to the two authors, the management style used by managers plays a critical role towards organizational performance. For instance, Miller (2010) has strongly emphasized on the merits of transformational leadership in modern-day management. Even though leadership styles are essential in management, performance or output matters a lot. (Miller, 2010)
Based on Drucker’s philosophy, a manager’s performance might be dismal even when he has good leadership styles. The world’s most successful managers are characterized by excellent performance. This implies that managers should be more focused towards delivering the desired results. Drucker’s philosophy on ‘substance over style’ has been widely used by many organizations in different parts of the world. This illustrates that his philosophy has an excellent framework for implementation. In order for managers to perform as expected, they must shun traditional aspects of management. For instance, organizational performance would be compromised if managers are excessively authoritative. It is always essential to formulate management systems based on institutional values. Such an approach ensures that managers do not focus on selfish interests. (Daft, 2009)
Enhancing the Knowledge of Workers
Even though Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011) have examined numerous aspects of modern management theories, they have not assessed the enhancement of employees’ knowledge. According to the foundational management theories of Peter Drucker, most organizations tend to emphasize on material assets or raw materials of management. However, this should not be the case in modern day management. Considering that employees are the most vital assets, management systems should strive towards enhancing workers’ knowledge. (Yaniv, 2011)
Drucker’s philosophy emphasizes that organizations would strongly enhance innovativeness if they equip workers with sufficient knowledge. Innovativeness is a critical element in modern day organizations. It enhances competitiveness by boosting the quality of products and services. On the other hand, Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011) have emphasized on company-client relations in their articles.
Enhancing employees’ knowledge is also serves as a great framework for minimizing costs. This is because the workers are more effective and spend minimal time to complete numerous tasks. The knowledge aspects of Drucker’s philosophy are evident in most firms around the world. Corporate establishments have realized the benefits of a knowledgeable workforce. A firm like Microsoft spends millions of dollars while training employees. According to Drucker’s philosophy, the return rate of these types of management tactics is very high. (Adetule, 2009)
Management and Risk-taking
The perspective of risk-taking in management forms another point of difference between Drucker’s philosophy and the theories presented by Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011). According to Peter Drucker, successful managers must be ready to take risks when necessary. However, such risks should be based on calculated moves. Essentially, a successful manager must have the capacity to evaluate the implications of any given risk. (Miller, 2010)
The assessment should be all-inclusive in such a way that costs and benefits are assessed. In their respective articles, Yaniv and Miller have not provided a framework for risk-taking management. Based on Drucker’s philosophy, management decisions are the most sensitive aspects of taking risks. A simple decision can easily undermine or enhance all activities within a corporate establishment. (Adetule, 2009)
Conclusion
This assignment has presented a detailed analysis of differences between Peter Drucker’s foundational management philosophy and other management theories. While formulating this philosophy, Peter Drucker was aware of the huge demands of modern-day management. Furthermore, this foundational management philosopher was assertive that firms would be rendered redundant if they disrespect employees. Importantly, management systems that appreciate the role of employees are characterized by excellent levels of effectiveness. This perspective is also lacking in the management theories outlined by Miller (2010) and Yaniv (2011).
Based on Drucker’s philosophy, a manager’s performance might be dismal even when he has good leadership styles. The world’s most successful managers are characterized by excellent performance. This perspective also highlights the difference between Drucker’s philosophy and other management theories provided by Yaniv (2011) and Miller (2010). It is always essential to formulate management systems based on institutional values. Such an approach ensures that managers do not focus on selfish interests.
Research Trail
In order to obtain the required information for this essay, a systematic research process was used. Different sources were examined in order to gather information about different management philosophers. The information provided in these sources was then examined based on reliability and credibility. Even though the internet contains a lot of information of foundational management philosophy, it cannot be relied upon as the sole source. This is because it lacks academic credibility. Furthermore, most information on the internet does not meet the criteria for scholarly sources. It is therefore important to ensure that authors are not biased towards any particular issue. This goes a long way towards enhancing the quality of research.
Consequently, the research trail was limited to scholarly sources of information like academic journals, peer-reviewed articles, books and periodicals. This tactic was used in order to enhance the quality of research and originality in writing. Miller’s article for the Strategic Management Journal was one of the first sources used for this assignment. The article has presented numerous issues pertaining to the evaluation of different management theories. Based on information provided in the article, it is easy for the reader to understand different perspectives of management. Yaniv’s article for the Academy of Management Review is another source that was used during the research process. The article has highlighted some of the most critical issues in modern day management. Classic and scientific theories of management have also been documented in the article. Consequently, the article has provided an excellent framework for understanding the impacts of different management theories.
The credibility of these articles was evaluated based on their publishers and academic integrity. These two factors play an instrumental role towards determining the reliability of sources. In both articles, the authors have made reference to Peter Drucker’s philosophies of foundational management. Even though other philosophers have also been highlighted, Drucker has made an outstanding contribution towards management theories. This is mainly because his theories have been widely applied in numerous corporate establishments around the world. Furthermore, his philosophies have integrated numerous aspects of management. As a result of these credentials, it was important to examine his philosophies.
References
Adetule, P. J. (2009). Handbook on management theories, IN: Authorhouse
Daft, R. L. & Lane, P. (2009). Management, OH: South-Western
Miller, K. D. & Tsang, E. W. (2010). “Testing management theories,” Strategic Management Journal, 32(2)
Yaniv, E. (2011). “Construct clarity in theories of management and organization,”Academyof Management Review, 36(3)
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
