Post-Economic Theory 新しい経済学

We have an approach that relates economics to human values.

  Tomorrow’s economics must answer the questions: “How do we relate the way we run a business to results? What are results?” The traditional answer – “the bottom line” - is treacherous. Under a bottom-line philosophy, we cannot relate the short run to the long term, and yet the balance between the two is a crucial test of management.
  The beacons of productivity and innovation must be our guideposts. If we achieve profits at the cost of downgrading productivity or not innovating, they aren’t profits. We’re destroying capital. On the other hand, if we continue to improve productivity of all key resources and improve our innovative standing, we are going to be profitable. Not only today, but tomorrow. In looking at knowledge applied to human work as the source of wealth, we also see the function of the economic organization. For the first time we have an approach that makes economics a human discipline and relates it to human values, a theory that gives a businessperson a yardstick to measure whether she’s still moving in the right direction and whether her results are real or delusions. We are on the threshold of posteconomic theory, grounded in what we know and understand about the generation of wealth.

ACTION POINT: Measure or assess your organization’s performance on the two economic guideposts – productivity and innovation.

The Ecological Vision






2009.05.31 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Rank of Knowledge Workers 知識の優劣

“Philosophy is the queen of the sciences,” says an old tag.
But to remove a kidney stone, you want a urologist rather than a logician.

  Knowledge workers can work only because there is an organization for them to work in. In that respect, they are dependent. But at the same time, they own the “means of production,” that is, their knowledge. The knowledge worker sees herself as just another “professional,” no different from the lawyer, the teacher, the preacher, the doctor, the government servant of yesterday. She has the same education. She may realize that she depends on the organization for access to income and opportunity, and without the investment the organization has made, there would be no job for her. But she also realizes, and rightly so, that the organization equally depends on her.
  No knowledge “ranks” higher than another. The position of each in an organization is determined by its contribution to the common task rather than by any inherent superiority or inferiority.

ACTION POINT: Determine how your knowledge can be used to make the maximum contribution to your organization. Get agreement from your boss and colleagues on how you can maximize your contribution.

Post-Capitalist Society
The Age of Discontinuity





2009.05.30 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Raise the Yield of Existing Knowledge 知識の実り

“Only Connect.”

  In learning and teaching, we do have to focus on the tool. In usage, we have to focus on the end result, on the task, on the work. “Only connect” was the constant admonition of a great English novelist, E. M. Forster. It has always been the hallmark of the artist, but equally of the great scientist. At their level, the capacity to connect may be inborn and part of that mystery we call “genius.” But to a large extent, the ability to connect and thus to raise the yield of existing knowledge is learnable. Eventually, it should become teachable. It requires a methodology for problem definition – even more urgently perhaps than it requires the methodology for “problem solving.” It requires systematic analysis of the kind of knowledge and information a given problem requires, and a methodology for organization the states in which a given problem can be tackled – the methodology that underlies what we now call “systems research.” It requires what might be called “Organizing Ignorance” – and there is always so much more ignorance around than there is knowledge.
  Specialization into knowledges has given us enormous performance potential in each area. But because knowledges are so specialized, we need also a methodology, a discipline, a process to turn this potential into performance. Otherwise, most of the available knowledge will not become productive; it will remain mere information. To make knowledge productive, we will have to learn to connect.

ACTION POINT: Spend sufficient time on the definition of a problem prior to making a decision.

Post-Capitalist Society





2009.05.29 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Continuous Learning in Knowledge Work 知識労働者にとっての継続学習

A knowledge organization has to be both a learning organization
and a teaching organization.

  Know workers must have continuous learning built into their tasks. And a knowledge organization has to be both a learning organization and a teaching organization. Knowledge today, in all areas, changes so fast that knowledge workers become obsolete pretty soon unless they build continuous learning into their work. And that is not just true of high knowledge such as that of the engineer, the chemist, the biologist, or the accountant. It’s increasingly just as true of the cardiac nurse, the person who handles payroll records, and the computer repair person. But also, a knowledge organization depends on knowledge specialists understanding what their colleagues are doing or trying to do. And each of them has a different specialty. Knowledge workers need, therefore, to hold themselves responsible for educating their colleagues, especially when the knowledge base of their own specialty changes.
  This means that knowledge workers are well advised to sit down and answer two questions:
  1. What do I need to learn to keep abreast of the knowledge I am being paid to know?
  2. And what do my associates have to know and understand about my knowledge area and about what it can and should contribute to the organization and to their own work?

ACTION POINT: Answer the two questions at the end of this reading.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century
Knowledge Worker Productivity (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.28 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Management: A Practice 実学としてのマネジメント

The test of any policy in management…is not whether the answer is
right or wrong, but whether it works.

  The GM executives believed that they had discovered principles and that those principles were absolutes, like laws of nature. I, by contrast, have always held that principles of this kind, being man-made, are at best heuristic. This has been the one point on which my approach to management has always differed from that of the writers or theoreticians on the subject – and the reason, perhaps, that I have never been quite respectable in the eyes of academia. I do believe that there are basic values, especially human ones. But I do not believe that there is “one correct answer.” There are answers that have a high probability of being the wrong ones – at least to the point where one does not even try them unless all else has failed. But the test of any policy in management or in any other social discipline is not whether the answer is right or wrong, but whether it works. Management, I have always believed, is not a branch of theology but, at bottom, a clinical discipline. The test, as in the practice of medicine, is not whether the treatment is “scientific” but whether the patient recovers.

ACTION POINT: List three “rules of thumb” you have found helpful for improving performance. Cite a “textbook principle” that has not worked for you.

Concept of the Corporation





2009.05.27 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Defining Quality in knowledge Work 知識労働の仕事の定義

Measuring quality in knowledge work sounds formidable.
In practice, it defines it self.

  In some knowledge work – and especially in some work requiring a high degree of knowledge – we already measure quality. Surgeons, for instance, are routinely measured, by their success rates in difficult and dangerous procedures, for example, by the survival rates of their open-heart surgical patients. But by and large we have, so far, mainly judgments rather than measures regarding the quality of a great deal of knowledge work. The main trouble is, however, not the difficulty of measuring quality. It is the difficulty in defining what the task is and what it should be.
  The best example is the American school. Public schools in the American inner city have become disaster areas. But next to them – in the same location and serving the same kinds of children – are private schools in which the kids behave well and learn well. There is endless speculation to explain these enormous quality differences. But a major reason is surely that the two kinds of schools define their tasks differently. The typical public school defines its task as “helping the underprivileged”; the typical private school (and especially the parochial schools of the Catholic church) define their task as “enabling those who want to learn, to learn.” One therefore is governed by its scholastic failures, the other one by its scholastic successes.

ACTION POINT: Define quality for your job.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century





2009.05.26 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Defining Results in Knowledge Work 知識労働の成果

Results for a scientist – the advancement of scientific knowledge –
may be quite irrelevant to the organization.

  Defining the task makes it possible to define what the results of a given task should be. There is often more than one right answer to the question of what the right results are. Salespeople are right when they define results as the largest sale per customer, and they are also right when they define results as customer retention.
  Hence the next and crucial step in making the knowledge worker productive is to define what results are or should be in a particular knowledge worker’s task. This is – and should be – a controversial decision. It is also a risk-taking decision. Above all, it is the point where the individual worker’s task and the mission of the organization converge and have to be harmonized. It is up to management to decide whether the department store aims at maximum sales per transaction or at maximum sales per customer. It is up to management to decide whether the patient or the physician is the primary customer of the hospital. And this decision is going to be one of the permanent challenges for managers and executives in the knowledge organization.

ACTION POINT: Define results for your position. Harmonize any conflict between the way you define results and the way the organization defines results your position.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century
Knowledge Worker Productivity (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.25 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Defining the Task in Knowledge Work 知識労働の仕事

In knowledge work, the how only comes after the what has been answered.

  In manual work the task is always given. Wherever there still are domestic servants, the owner of the house tells them what to do. The machine or the assembly line programs the factory worker. But, in knowledge work, what to do becomes the first and decisive question. For knowledge workers are not programmed by the machine. They largely are in control of their own tasks and must be in control of their own tasks. For they, and only they, own and control the most expensive of the means of production – their education – and their most important tool – their knowledge. They do use other tools, of course, whether the nurse’s IV or the engineer’s computer. But their knowledge decides how these tools are being used and for what. They know what steps are most important and what methods need to be used complete the tasks; and it is their knowledge that tells them what chores are unnecessary and should be eliminated.
  Work on knowledge-worker productivity therefore begins with asking the knowledge workers themselves: What is your task? What should it be? What should you be expected to contribute? and What hampers you in doing your task and should be eliminated? The how only comes after the what has been answered.

ACTION POINT: Define your task as a knowledge worker by asking yourself: “What do I get paid for?” and “What should I get paid for?”

Management Challenges for the 21st Century
Knowledge Worker Productivity (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.24 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Knowledge-Worker Productivity 知識労働の生産性向上

Knowledge-worker productivity requires that the knowledge worker
be both seen and treated as an asset rather than a cost.

  Work on the productivity of the knowledge worker has barely begun. But we already know a good many of the answers. We also know the challenges to which we do not yet know the answers.
  Six major factors determine knowledge-worker productivity.
  1. Knowledge-worker productivity demands that we ask the question: “What is the task?”
  2. It demands that we impose the responsibility for their productivity on the individual knowledge workers themselves. Knowledge workers have to manage themselves. They have to have autonomy.
  3. Continuing innovation has to be part of the work, the task, and the responsibility of knowledge workers.
  4. Knowledge work requires continuous learning on the part of the knowledge worker, but equally continuous teaching on the part of the knowledge worker.
  5. Productivity of the knowledge worker is not – at least not primarily – a matter of the quantity of output. Quality is at least as important.
  6. Finally, knowledge-worker productivity requires that the knowledge worker be both seen and treated as an “asset” rather than a “cost.” It requires that knowledge workers want to work for the organization in preference to all other opportunities.

ACTION POINT: Apply steps one through five to your knowledge work.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century





2009.05.23 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Raising Service-Worker Productivity サービス労働のアウトソーシング

Sell the mailroom.

  Improving the productivity of service workers will demand fundamental changes in the structure of the organizations. Service work in many cases will be contracted out of the organization to whom the service is being rendered. This applies particularly to support work, such as maintenance, and to a good deal of clerical work. “Outsourcing,” moreover, will be applied increasingly to such work as drafting for architects and to the technical or professional library. In fact, American law firms already contract out to an outside computerized “database” most of what their own law library used to do.
  The greatest need for increased productivity is in activities that do not lead to promotion into senior management within the organization. But nobody in senior management is likely to be much interested in this kind of work, know enough about it, care greatly for it, or even consider it important. Such work does not fit the organization’s value system. In the hospital, for instance, the value system is that of the doctors and nurses. They are concerned with patient care. No one therefore pays much attention to maintenance work, support work, clerical work. We should therefore expect within a fairly short period of years to find such work contracted out to independent organizations, which compete and get paid for their own effectiveness in making this kind of work more productive.

ACTION POINT: Make your backroom service activities someone else’s front room.

Post-Capitalist Society
Managing for the Future





2009.05.22 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Productivity of Service Work サービス労働の生産性

Raising the productivity of service work is the first
social responsibility of management.

  The need to raise the productivity of service work is a social priority in developed countries. Unless it is met, the developed world faces increasing social tensions, increasing polarization, increasing radicalization. It may increasingly face a new class war. Unless the productivity of service work is rapidly improved, both the social and economic position of a large class – as large a group as people making and moving things ever were at their peak – must steadily go down. Real incomes cannot for any length of time be higher than productivity. The service workers may use their numerical strength to get higher wages than their economic contribution justifies. But this only impoverishes all of society with everybody’s real income going down and unemployment going up. Or the incomes of the unskilled workers are allowed to go down in relation to the steadily rising wages of the affluent knowledge workers, with an increasing gulf between the two groups, an increasing polarization into classes. In either case the service workers must become alienated, increasingly bitter, increasingly see themselves as a class apart.
  We know how to raise service work productivity. This is production work and what we have learned during the past hundred years about increasing productivity applies to such work with minimum adaptation. The task is known and doable, but the urgency is great. It is, in fact, the first social responsibility of management in the knowledge society.

ACTION POINT: Set annual targets for raising the productivity of your service staff. Reward those who are successful in meeting these new targets.

The Ecological Vision





2009.05.21 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Making Manual Work Productive 体を使う高度の知識労働

Knowledge work includes manual operations
that require industrial engineering.

  Frederick Winslow Taylor’s principles sound deceptively simple. The first step in making the manual worker productive is to look at the task and to analyze its constituent motions. The next step is to record each motion, the physical effort it takes and the time it takes. Then motions that are not needed can be eliminated. Then each of the motions that remain as essential to obtaining the finished product is set up so as to be done the simplest way, the easiest way, the way that puts the least physical and mental strain on the operator, the way that requires the least time. Then these motions are put together again into a “job” that is in logical sequence. Finally, the tools needed to do the motions are redesigned.
  Taylor’s approach is still going to be the organizing principle in countries in which manual work is the growth sector of society and economy. In developed countries the challenge is no longer to make manual work productive. The central challenge will be to make knowledge workers productive. But, there is a tremendous amount of knowledge work – including work requiring highly advanced and theoretical knowledge – that includes manual operations. And the productivity of these operations also requires Industrial Engineering, the name by which Taylor’s methodology now goes.

ACTION POINT: Figure out the mix of knowledge work and manual work in your job. Apply the basic principles of industrial engineering to the latter.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century





2009.05.20 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

People as Resources 資源としての人材

People are a resource and not just a cost.

  The Japanese heeded first and best my point of view that people must be viewed as your colleagues and as one of your prime resources. It is only through such respect of the workers that true productivity is achieved.
  People are a resource and not just a cost. The most enlightened managers have started to understand what could be realized by managing people toward a desired end or goal. Management is so much more than exercising rank and privilege; it’s so much more than “making deals”. Management affects people and their lives, both in business and in many other aspects as well.

ACTION POINT: Look at people as resources to be developed. Take steps to expose your people and yourself to the best ideas and see to it that they are trained in how to apply them.

Managing in a Time of Great Change





2009.05.19 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The Corporation as a Syndicate 異業種シンジケートの出現

The model for the syndicate is the nineteenth-century farmers’ cooperative.

  The approaches at GM and Toyota, however different, still take the traditional corporation as their point of departure. But there are also some new ideas that do away with the corporate model altogether.
  One example is a “syndicate” being tested by several noncompeting manufactures in the European Union. Each of the constituent companies is medium-sized, family-owned, and owner-managed. Each is a leader in a narrow, highly engineered product line. Each is heavily export-dependent. The individual companies intend to remain independent, and to continue to design their products separately. They will also continue to make them in their own plants for their main markets, and to sell them in these markets. But for other markets, and especially for emerging or less-developed countries, the syndicate will arrange for the making of the products, either in syndicate-owned plants producing for several of the members or by local contract manufacturers. The syndicate will handle the delivery of all members’ products, and service them in all markets. Each member will own a share of the syndicate, in turn, will own a small share of each member’s capital. If this sounds familiar, it is because the model is the nineteenth-century farmers’ cooperative.

ACTION POINT: Decide whether your organization would benefit from being part of an existing or a new syndicate.

Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.18 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The Corporation as Confederation 2つのネットワーク型企業

From corporation to confederation.

  Here are two prominent examples of the corporation as a confederation. Eighty years ago General Motors first developed both the organizational concepts and the organizational structure upon which today’s large corporations everywhere are based. And it was based for seventy-five of these eighty years on two basic principles. We own as much as possible of whatever we manufacture and we own everything we do. Now it is experimenting with becoming the minority partner in competing companies: Saab in Sweden, Suzuki and Isuzu in Japan, and it’s about to become the controlling minority partner of Fiat. At the same time, it has divested itself of 70 or 80 percent of what it manufactures.
  The second example goes exactly the other way. It’s Toyota, which for the last twenty year or so has been the most successful automotive company. It is restructuring itself around its core competency – manufacturing. It is moving away from having multiple suppliers of parts and accessories to having only one or two everyplace. At the same time, it uses its manufacturing competence to manage these suppliers. They remain independent companies but they are basically part of Toyota in terms of management.

ACTION POINT: Understand the structure of your industry by analyzing whether your organization and its competitors are more like GM or Toyota.

Managing in the Next Society
The Next Society (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.17 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Managing Nontraditional Employees 雇用形態の多様化

The challenge to executives is to coordinate efforts
of all categories of workers.

  Along with full-time employees, PEOs, and temp workers, there may also be a closely linked but separately managed organization made up of nontraditional employees in the new corporation. Increasingly, employees take early retirement but they do not stop working. Instead, their “second career” often takes an unconventional form. They may work freelance, or part-time, or as temporaries, or for an outsourcing contractor, or as contractors themselves. Such “early retirement to keep on working” is particularly common among knowledge workers.
  Attracting and holding these diverse groups will become the central tasks of people management in the new corporation. These people do not have permanent relationships with the business. They may not have to be managed, but they have to be made productive. They will therefore have to be deployed where their specialized knowledge can make the greatest contribution. Managers need to work closely with their counterparts in the outsource contractor organization on the professional development, motivation, satisfaction, and productivity of these nontraditional workers.

ACTION POINT: Attract and integrate nontraditional employees effectively into your organization.

Managing in the Next Society
The Next Society (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.16 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Use of PEOs and BPOs 雇用業務のアウトソーシング

Outsourcing human resources management can save up to 30 percent
of the cost and increase employee satisfaction as well.

  Companies are experiencing important changes in human resources management and the Professional Employer Organizations, or PEOs, have been one response to these changes. Primary factors driving the growth of the industry include an increase in the complexity of laws and regulations governing the human resource function and the subsequent need for professional expertise to manage and maintain a workforce to deal with these new realities. PEOs concentrate mainly on small - and medium-size companies. The use of PEOs frees up managers to focus on their core competencies rather than on employment-related rules, regulations, and paperwork. This industry, which twenty years ago barely existed, is now growing at a rate of 30 percent a year.
  In contrast to PEOs, Business Process Outsourcing firms, or BPOs, assume full responsibility for performing the work of the human resource function in large enterprises, companies typically with twenty thousand or more employees. The innovator and leader in the BPO industry, Exult founded in 1998, now manages the full spectrum of employee process such as payroll, recruiting and staffing, training administration, employee-data management, relocation, and severance administration for a number of Global Fortune 500 companies. According to a study by McKinsey, the management consultancy, outsourcing human resources management in these ways can save up to 30 percent of the cost and increase employee satisfaction as well.

ACTION POINT: Are you outsourcing part of your human resource function? Why or why not?

Managing in the Next Society
The Next Society (Corpedia Online Program)


 今日、人材マネジメントが大きく変わりつつある。雇用業務代行会社(PEO)* が急成長しつつある。主たる原因は雇用関係規制と記帳報告義務の増大であり、それを処理するための専門能力へのニーズの増大である。雇用業務代行会社は主として中堅企業と中小企業を顧客にしている。この代行業を利用することによって、規制への対応と記帳義務から解放され、その分本業に力を入れることができるようになっている。二〇年前には、そのようなものがありうることさえ想像されなかったこの産業が、今日では年率三〇%で成長しつつある。
 従業員二万人以上の大企業を顧客とする人事業務代行会社(BPO)** まで急成長している。この業界のパイオニアである一九九八年創立のエグザルド社では、フォーチュン五〇〇社クラスの大企業を対象に、給与、採用、人事、教育、異動、データ管理、解雇、退職金計算など多様な業務をこなしている。


*訳注 プロフェッショナル・エンプロイヤー・オーガニゼーション
**訳注 ビジネス・プロセス・アウトソーシング・ファーム


2009.05.15 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Splintered Nature of Knowledge Work 知識労働の細分化

Knowledge work is deeply splintered in most organizations.

  Knowledge work is specialized, and because it is so specialized, it is deeply splintered in most organizations. Managing all of these specialties effectively is a big challenge for knowledge-based organizations. For example, hospitals may use outsourcing, PEOs (Professional Employer Organizations), and temp agencies to manage, place, and satisfy the highly specialized knowledge worker. This results in outsourcing part of the management task. The modern hospital provides a great example of the management complexities created by the splintering of knowledge work and the resultant use of outsourcing, PEOs as well as temp agencies.
  Even a fair-size community hospital with 275 to 300 beds will have approximately 3,000 people working for it. Close to half will be knowledge workers of one kind or another. Two of these groups, nurses and specialists in the business departments, are fairly large, numbering several hundred people each. But there are around thirty “paramedic specialties”: the physical therapists and the people in the clinical lab; the psychiatric case workers; the oncological technicians; the two dozen people who prepare people for surgery; the people in sleep clinics; the ultrasound technicians; the cardiac-clinic technicians; and many, many more. Managing all these specialties makes the modern hospital the most complex of modern organizations.

ACTION POINT: Identify functions in your organization that could be outsourced. Make plans to outsource these functions and to monitor performance and quality.

Managing in the Next Society
The Next Society (Corpedia Online Program)





2009.05.14 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Protectionism 保護主義の行末

Some of the greatest impediments to effectiveness are the issues
of yesterday, which still confine our vision.

  The decline in manufacturing as a creator of wealth and jobs will inevitably bring about a new protectionism. For the first reaction to a period of turbulence is to try to build a wall that shields one’s own garden from the cold winds outside. But such walls no longer protect institutions – and especially businesses – that do not perform up to world standards. It will only make them more vulnerable.
  The best example is Mexico, which for fifty years from 1929 on had a deliberate policy of building its domestic economy independent of the outside world. It did this not only by building high walls of protectionism to keep foreign competition out. It did it – and this was uniquely Mexican in the twentieth-century world – by practically forbidding its own companies to export. This attempt to create a modern but purely Mexican economy failed dismally. Mexico actually became increasingly dependent on imports, both of food and of manufactured products, from the outside world. It was finally forced to open itself to the outside world, since it simply could no longer pay for the needed imports. And then Mexico found that a good deal of its industry could not survive.

ACTION POINT: When manufacturing jobs decline, is the country’s manufacturing base threatened? Why is it so difficult to accept that society and the economy are no longer dominated by manual work in developed economies?

Management Challenges for the 21st Century
The New Realities
Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.13 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The Manufacturing Paradox 製造業のパラドックス

How do you get far more output with far fewer workers?

  The most believable forecast for 2020 suggests that manufacturing output in the developed countries will at least double, while manufacturing employment will shrink to 10 to 12 percent of the total workforce. What has changed manufacturing, and sharply pushed up productivity, are new concepts, such as “lean manufacturing.” Information and automation are less important than new theories of manufacturing, which are an advance comparable to the arrival of mass production eighty years ago.
  The decline in manufacturing as a creator of wealth and jobs will inevitably bring about a new protectionism, once again echoing what happened earlier in agriculture. The fewer farm voters there are, the more important the “farm vote” has become. As numbers have shrunk, farmers have become a unified special-interest group that carries disproportionate clout in all rich countries.

ACTION POINT: Determine the rate of growth in output per person in your manufacturing or operations functions. Is your organization experiencing the manufacturing paradox? Recommend programs for retraining excess manufacturing workers.

Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.12 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Managing Foreign Currency Exposure 為替リスクへの対策

Foreign exchange risks make speculators out of the
most conservative managements.

  Old and amply tested wisdom holds that unless a company’s business is primarily the trading of currencies or commodities, the firm inevitably will lose, and heavily, if it speculates in either. Yet foreign exchange risks make speculators out of the most conservative managements.
  Executives will have to learn to protect their enterprises against several kinds of foreign exchange risks: losses on sales or purchases in foreign currencies, and loss of sales and market standing in both foreign and domestic markets. These risks cannot be eliminated. But they can be minimized or at least contained. Above all, they can be converted into a known, predictable, and controlled cost of doing business not too different from any other insurance premium by the use of hedging and options. “Internationalizing” the company’s finances is also the best – perhaps the only – way in which a purely domestic firm can protect itself to some degree against foreign competition based on currency rates.

ACTION POINT: Protect your business against foreign-exchange risk by hedging your exposure.

The Frontiers of Management
The New Realities





2009.05.11 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Sickness of Government 政府とのロマンス

Our love affair with government is over,
although we keep the old mistress around.

  Rarely has there been a more torrid political love affair than that between government and the generations that reached adulthood between 1918 and 1960. Anything anyone felt needed doing during this period was to be turned over to government – and this, everyone seemed to believe, made sure that the job was already done.
  But now our attitudes are in transition. We are rapidly moving to doubt and distrust of government. We still, if only out of habit, turn social tasks over to government. We still revise unsuccessful programs over and over again, and assert that nothing is wrong with them that a change in procedures will not cure. But we no longer believe these promises when we reform a bungled program for the third time. We no longer expect results from government. Who, for instance, believes anymore that changes in the foreign aid program of the United States (or of the United Nations) will really produce rapid worldwide development? What was a torrid romance between the people and government for so very long has now become a tired, middle-aged liaison that we do not know how to break off but that only becomes exacerbated by being dragged out.

ACTION POINT: Propose a program to your congressional representative that applies logic from the work of your enterprise to solve a social problem and that doesn’t require new government funds.

The Age of Discontinuity





2009.05.10 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The Center of the knowledge Society 知識社会の中心の問題

Education will become the center of the knowledge society,
and schooling its key institution.

  Throughout history, the craftsman who had learned a trade after five or seven years of apprenticeship had learned, by age eighteen or nineteen, everything he would ever need to use during his lifetime. Today the new jobs require a good deal of formal education and the ability to acquire and apply theoretical and analytical knowledge. They require a different approach to work and a different mind-set. Above all they require a habit of continuous learning.
  What mix of knowledges is required for everybody? What is “quality” in learning and teaching? All these will, of necessity, become central concerns of the knowledge society, and central political issues. In fact, it may not be too fanciful to anticipate that the acquisition and distribution of formal knowledge will come to occupy the place in the politics of the knowledge society that the acquisition of property and income have occupied in the two ore three centuries that we have come to call the Ages of Capitalism.

ACTION POINT: Make learning a lifelong habit.

Managing in a Time of Great Change





2009.05.09 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Price of Success in the Knowledge Society 知識社会化の代償

The fear of failure has already permeated the knowledge society.

  The upward mobility of the knowledge society comes at a high price: the psychological pressures and emotional traumas of the rat race. There can be winners only if there are losers. This was not true of earlier societies.
  Japanese youngsters suffer sleep deprivation because they spend their evenings at a crammer to help them pass their exams. Otherwise they will not get into the prestige university of their choice, and thus into a good job. Other countries, such as America, Britain, and France, are also allowing their schools to become viciously competitive. That this has happened over such a short time – no more than thirty or forty years – indicates how much the fear of failure has already permeated the knowledge society. Given this competitive struggle, a growing number of highly successful knowledge workers – business managers, university teachers, museum directors, doctors – “plateau” in their forties. If their work is all they have, they are in trouble. Knowledge workers therefore need to develop some serious outside interest.

ACTION POINT: Develop a serious satisfying outside interest

Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.08 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

A Knowledge Society and Society of Organizations 組織社会となる知識社会

Specialized knowledge by itself produces nothing.

  Postcapitalist society is both a knowledge society and a society of organizations, each dependent on the other and yet each very different in its concepts, views, and values. Specialized knowledge by it self produces nothing. It can become productive only when it is integrated into a task. And this is why the knowledge society is also a society of organizations: the purpose and function of every organization, business and nonbusiness alike, is the integration of specialized knowledges into a common task. It is only the organization that can provide the basic continuity that knowledge workers need to be effective. It is only the organization that can convert the specialized knowledge of the knowledge worker into performance.
  Intellectuals see the organization as a tool; it enables them to practice their techne, their specialized knowledge. Managers see knowledge as a means to the end of organizational performance. Both are right. They are opposites; but they relate to each other as poles rather than as contradictions. If the two balance each other there can be creativity and order, fulfillment and mission.

ACTION POINT: Write a letter to your boss and colleagues describing the contributions you expect to make. Indicate your understanding of how your contributions integrate into the contributions of your colleagues to produce results for the organization.

Managing in a Time of Great Change
Post-Capitalist Society





2009.05.07 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Knowledge Does Not Eliminate Skill 知識と技能

Knowledge without skill is unproductive.

  At present, the term “knowledge worker” is widely used to describe people with considerable theoretical knowledge and learning: doctors, lawyers, teachers, accountants, chemical engineers. But, the most striking growth will be in “knowledge technologists”: computer technicians, software designers, analysts in clinical labs, manufacturing technologists, paralegals. These people are as much manual workers as they are knowledge workers; in fact, they usually spend far more time working with their hands than with their brains.
  So, knowledge does not eliminate skill. On the contrary, knowledge is fast becoming the foundation for skill. We are using knowledge more and more to enable people to acquire skills of a very advanced kind fast and successfully. Only when knowledge is used as a foundation for skill does it become productive. For example, surgeons preparing for an operation to correct a brain aneurysm before it produces a lethal brain hemorrhage spend hours in diagnosis before they cut – and that requires specialized knowledge of the highest order. The surgery itself, however, is manual work - and manual work consisting of repetitive manual operations in which the emphasis is on speed, accuracy, uniformity. And these operations are studied, organized, learned, and practiced exactly like any other manual work.

ACTION POINT: Outline the skills required in your work. Analyze and refine these skills for optimum quality and productivity.

The Age of Discontinuity
Management Challenges for the 21st Century
Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.06 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The New Pluralism 新多元社会の到来

Each of the new institutions perceives its own purpose as central,
as ultimate value, and as the one thing that really matters.

  The new pluralist organization of society has no interest in government or governance. Unlike the earlier pluralist institutions, it is not a “whole.” As such, its results are entirely on the outside. The product of a business is a satisfied customer. The product of a hospital is a cured patient. The “product” of the school is a student who ten years later puts to work what he or she has learned.
  In some ways the new pluralism is thus far more flexible, far less divisive than the old pluralism. The new institutions do not encroach on political power as did the old pluralist institutions, whether the medieval church, feudal baron, or free city. The new institutions, however, unlike the old ones, do not share identical concerns or see the same world. Each of the new institutions perceives its own purpose as central, as ultimate value, and as the one thing that really matters. Every institution speaks its own language, has its own knowledge, its own career ladder, and above all, its own values. No one of them sees itself as responsible for the community as a whole. That is somebody else’s business. But whose?

ACTION POINT: Reflect on the political disease of single-interest pluralism of our society.

The New Realities





2009.05.05 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Characteristics of the Next Society ネクスト・ソサエティの特徴

Every institution in the knowledge society has to be globally competitive.

  The next society will be a knowledge society. Its three main characteristics will be:
  • Borderlessness, because knowledge travels even more effortlessly than money.
  • Upward mobility, available to everyone through easily acquired formal education.
  • The potential for failure as well as success. Anyone can acquire the “means of production,” that is, the knowledge required for the job, but not everyone can win.
Together, those three characteristics will make the knowledge society a highly competitive one, for organizations and individuals alike.
  Information technology, although only one of many new features of the next society, is already having one hugely important effect: it is allowing knowledge to spread near-instantly, and making it accessible to everyone. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society – not only businesses, but also schools, universities, hospitals, and increasingly, government agencies, too – has to be globally competitive, even though most organizations will continue to be local in their activities and in their markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at what price.

ACTION POINT: Find out how many customers you are losing because the Internet is making them more savvy about price. Decide whether to cut your prices to compete.

Managing in the Next Society





2009.05.04 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

Global Competitiveness eコマース下の競争力

“Think globally, act locally.”

  Strategy has to accept a new fundamental. Any institution – and not just business – has to measure itself against the standards set by each industry’s leaders anyplace in the world. Given the ease and speed at which information travels, every institution in the knowledge society has to be globally competitive, even though most organizations will continue to be local in their activities and markets. This is because the Internet will keep customers everywhere informed on what is available anywhere in the world, and at price. E-commerce will create new global channels for commerce and wealth distribution.
  Here is an example. An entrepreneur developed a highly successful engineering design firm in Mexico. He complains that one of his toughest job is to convince associates and colleagues that the competition is no longer merely Mexican. Even without the physical presence of competitors, the Internet allows customers to stay abreast of global offerings and demand the same quality of designs in Mexico. This executive must convince his associates that the competition faced by the firm is global and the performance of the firm must be compared against global competitors, not just those in Mexico.

ACTION POINT: Look at your domestic and foreign competitors’ Web sites and compare them to your organization’s Web site. If you don’t like what you see, invest more in e-commerce.

Management Challenges for the 21st Century
The Next Society (Corpedia Script for Online Program)





2009.05.03 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

The Network Society ネットワーク社会の到来

The developed countries are moving fast toward a Network Society.

  For well over a hundred years, all developed countries were moving steadily toward an employee society of organizations. Now the developed countries, with the United States in the lead, are moving fast toward a Network Society in respect to the relationship between organizations and individuals who work for them, and in respect to the relationship between different organizations.
  Most adults in the U.S. labor force do work for an organization. But increasingly they are not employees of that organization. They are contractors, part-timers, temporaries. And relations between organizations are changing just as fast as the relations between organizations and the people who work for them. The most visible example is “outsourcing,” in which a company, a hospital, or a government agency turns over an entire activity to an independent firm that specializes in that kind of work. Even more important may be the trend toward alliances. Individual professionals and executives will have to learn that they must take responsibility for placing themselves. This means above all they must know their strength and look upon themselves as “products” that have to be marketed.

ACTION POINT: Make a list of the top ten reasons you are attractive as a partner in an alliance.

Managing in a Time of Great Change





2009.05.02 | Trackback(0) | Drucker ドラッカー

«  | HOME |  »



【スエルテ - SUERTE】

Author:【スエルテ - SUERTE】
ピーター・ドラッカー(P.F.ドラッカー、Peter Ferdinand Drucker)の鋭い洞察力および示唆に富んだ文章は我々を魅了します。
『The Daily Drucker(ドラッカー 365の金言)』を元に毎日解説していきます。