Russian Roulette Android

Transcription

12/26/12
Does formal Management Training produce better managers? Please share your thoughts | LinkedIn
Go to LinkedIn Ads »
Home
Profile
Contacts
Groups
6
Jobs
2
Add Connections
Douglas Reed
Inbox
Search
Companies
News
Groups
More
Search...
Lead Info Dashboard - See Your Offline & Online Marketing Data On One Dashboard. Check It Out!
Harvard Business Review
Discussions
Members
Promotions
Jobs
Search
Discussion |
More...
Does formal Management Training produce better managers? Please share
your thoughts
Poll | Group rules
Share Discussion
http://lnkd.in/kzNraQ
In my experience and from what I hear from many, a lot of poor managers actually studied
management.
1 month ago
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Latest Updates
Unlike
Comment
Follow
Flag
More
Paul Weismantel commented in the
group on Is an Implementation Plan
necessary to a Strategic Plan? What
do you/would you include in the
Implementation Plan?: Adding to the
importance of the elements Ricky
has raised, the "plan" is not done
until all of these components are
sorted out across the...
You, Mohamed Benmerikhi, Shailendra Verma and 53 others like this
265 comments • Jump to most recent comments
Show previous comments
Like
Dr. Alvin H Steward III • Formal management training adds value to and supports
experience which is how I believe most good managers are made. The thing I believe is
most valuable even beyond training, education and experience is the desire to be the best
leader or manager that one can possibly be.
Follow Dr. Alvin
H
Follow John
John Schultz • Training does make a difference, particularly when it is coupled with
coaching, mentoring, and experience. However, there are plenty of programs being
marketed based on popular notions about management. These are mostly about mental
attitude. Some of the technical fundamentals are missing, which may leave participants
feeling bluster and bluff are all that is needed.
This does raise the question, “What are the competencies or skills that should typify a
capable and effective manager?” “What should a person know in concise and teachable or
learnable terms?” Sorting out expectations for managers or leaders might help answer the
question about training.
Follow Sat Paul
30 seconds ago
150 people have joined the group,
including David Peterson, Lisa
Tunstall and Hernan Rios
32 seconds ago
23 days ago • Like
Comment (9)
Michelle Shail, MSOD likes this
comment by Carl Byron Rodgers
Is Emotional Intelligence important
for a manager ? Why and How ?:
Why ? Because it facilitates Trust.
How ? Integrity. The Lewin's
Equation, B=ƒ(P,E), is a
psychological equation of behavior
developed...
Like (1)
2 minutes ago
See all updates »
1
Sat Paul Parashar, PhD • Yes it does PROVIDED Intended Learning Outcomes of
formal management training include making better managers (better specified whatever
way; in terms of knowledge, skills, attitude, personal abilities). One more positive of formal
management training is: it is time and cost saving. An accomplished formal trainer is a
great time saving machine.She / He hands down year's knowledge and experience in
hours and minutes. 'Learning by doing' or 'by observation' always tends to be more costly
and time taking. Not to miss, however, "Nobody can educate or train anybody. Education
and training is a self-learning process. Educators and Trainers only facilitate. Education
and training is largely the commitment and dedication of the learner."
Follow Clemence
Clemence Moyo • This discussion is getting more interesting. Thanks Brian for the
initiation. My understanding of "fromal training" is going through some prescribed
management training programme that equips one with the theory of management. The
programme can result in a certificate, Diploma or Degree in management. In my initial
contribution I referred to management graduates with a first degree in management or an
MBA. I don't believe that a one week course in an isolated area of management such as
'Delegation Techniques' would qualify as formal management training. Despite the
complexity of management as an area of sudy operatives and some business leaders
continue to take a very simplistic view of what management is. Businesses fail or prosper
because of the quality of its management/leadership and nothing else.
I rose to the position of General Manager before I received formal training in management
besides isolated management training programmes. When I went to Graduate School to
study management, I could not believe how much I did not know and how organisations
survived with untrained managers. I still hold that same view. Experience can only be built
on sound theoratical grounding and I seem to see the consfusion between training,
www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=188765830&gid=3044…
Manager's Choice
How are you utilizing Big Data
in your business?
Barbara Didia
See all »
Top Influencers This Week
1/20
12/26/12
experience and competence featuring prominently in this discussion. Competence has
nothing to do with training and/or experience. Experience is proficiency that practioners
gain from repeated practice and exposure of the right things during the life of one's
profession. Trial and error cannot be a substitute for theory and hence experience.
Tracy Williams
While there are many untrained leaders who have done exceptionally well, there aren't as
many untrained managers who are succesful. The difference comes from the simple
difference between leaders and managers which is that " leaders decide what to do guided
by their influencing ability while managers decide how to do it suported by formal
authority". This difference is critical because the how part describes a cause and effect
relationship which is theory. Theory is obtained through formal training. I insist that formal
training produces well grounded managers who perform much better than their untrained
managers once they obtain the necessary experience. This is not to say that there aren't
isolated cases of untrained managers who have outperformed trined managers.
Jairo Aparecido Martins
Dr. Brian Monger
Jason Scott
1
Sadi Hamidy
Follow Robert
Robert Jensen AIMM, MAIPM • I'll agree with many, in short the best Managers and
Leaders are likely to have qualifications and practical experience in their field or industry.
The world is not an ideal place so we have two ends of the spectrum, and most are
somewhere in the middle.
If I was setting a manager up to succeed I would ensure they either held qualifications, or I
would be prepared to invest in that person's development and give them access to this
important foundation.
You can teach an old dog new tricks, and clever one's pick them up fast and run like
crazy :-)
1
Very true, they provide an environment conducive to learning.
CHECK OUT
INSIGHTFUL
STATISTICS
ON THIS GROUP
Dr. Brian Monger • Sat ""Nobody can educate or train anybody. Education and training
is a self-learning process. Educators and Trainers only facilitate. "
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Group Statistics
Director
Manager
Entry
MEMBERS
3,759
View Group Statistics »
2
Sat Paul Parashar, PhD • Brian, any thoughts on 'time saving machine' perspective of
formal training and trainers?
Follow Sat Paul
Dr. Brian Monger • Sorry Sat. I don't know about that - please tell me
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Prof P.K.Keshap • Agreed Dr. Brian "Nobody can educate or train anybody. Education
and training is a self-learning process. Educators and Trainers only facilitate." That's true.
Follow Prof
Ankit Khandelwal • Very simple answer: 'Practise makes person better'. So if someone
has not practice the basic element of being a good manager, education wont make him
better manager. Managing is more about human interaction and less about using the
studied tool.
Follow Ankit
ilyas khan • nt necessary.
I have seen some best of manager and some worst of it. wonder it is "Managing is more
about human interaction and less about using the studied tool. "
Follow ilyas
Prof P.K.Keshap • IQ+EQ+SQ=Good Manager
Follow Prof
2/20
12/26/12
shivkumar yadav • it is by birth charecter it can be improoved by training only
Follow
shivkumar
Dr. Brian Monger • Dr Shivkumar People are not born with management characteristics.
Who suggested that to you? Your manager?
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Not something you learned at Uni I expect? But at whatever stage of management skill,
you are right - it can be improved by further training
1
Dr. Brian Monger • Ilyas - even assuming that it was that simple, don't you think working
on "your game" would improve it? Even cricketers do that
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Dr. Brian Monger • Ankit, yes a simple answer, but is it right?
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
- say I am smart - will not study make me smarter?
If I am a good mananger - how will further study not help to make me better?
Do your thoughts about training also apply to being and engineer?
Dr. Brian Monger • PK and an understanding of organisational and personal behaviour?
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Nouman Zahid • Unfortunately not but it’s not about trainings standards it’s about lack of
trainings/leanings follow-ups or lack of tracking systems of trainings
1
Follow Nouman
Ankit Khandelwal • Dr. Brian. - What I have written is from the experience of some of the
incidents in recent years. Of course, education makes you smarter but we are talking
about becoming a good Manager. If there are 100 people getting the same education than
what differentiate you from other 99 on whether you are a good manager or not?
Follow Ankit
Engineering is quiet different from managing humans. It is govern by fundamental laws and
new innovations comes out while searching for finding answers. Can you compare
machines with humans? or a flow of a chemical with the flow of human emotions?
Deepak Bhatt (Management Thinker) • Until and unless managers will not put this
training into practice, it is time wasting activity
Follow Deepak
Prof P.K.Keshap • Attitude makes the difference. Positive creates opportunities while
negative destroys the opportunities.
Follow Prof
Prof P.K.Keshap • Yes Dr. Brian an understanding of organizational and personal
behavior. Agreed.
3/20
12/26/12
Follow Prof
Cay Hasselmann • I think you need formal training as otherwise you cannot create the
commodity called managers. The area of the commodity build by training is also very
important to create roles that can be sold by PSO into companies.
Follow Cay
However training is usually often the the area why we suffer on excellence, but most
enterprises need a lot more of mediocre managers than the super stars, as the super
stars do not usually fit in.
Don Phin • I tend to agree with Dr. Deming that to ask this question is a bit of a waste of
time. It's like asking if training has an ROI. You either have the belief/philosophy that
education is the greatest form of leverage...or you do not. In my experience those you
learn more earn more. Nuff said!
Follow Don
Don Phin • To paraphrase an old light bulb joke...
Q How many trainings does it take to make a great manager?
Follow Don
A: 16.5, but they have to want to be a great manager!
PS lot's of great training in this discussion!
Jason Martin, MBA • I believe education of managers biulds the toolbox of ideas and
concepts but the implementation of these tools are more supported by experience and
values. If education more directly influrenced the performance of a manager, there would
be less poor performing managers.
Follow Jason
Tracy Letch MBA Saint Mary's College Moraga • I agree~ with statements made here
about the "toolbox" that an education provides. However, managers need to use their tool
box to maximize the ROI in their education.
Follow Tracy
James Domingo • Dr. Brian wrote: "In my experience and from what I hear from many, a
lot of poor managers actually studied management."
Follow James
Good observation and I totally agree. That's because poor managers studied management
and not leadership. You can teach just about anyone the process of managing things.
However it is impossible to manage people. People are not things, they are people and
you have to lead them.
I find the vast majority of great leaders learned from other great leaders in the context of
doing, not in the context of a training room listening to someone who isn't even a real
manager give a PowerPoint presentation on how to "manage."
If training were the answer the problem would already have been solved.
1
Syed Raza • Training provides tools but a bad carpenter quarrels with his tools.
Leadership is not taught but learnt if the learner is open to ideas and correct
himself/herself.
Follow Syed
visit by blog : www.disruptick.com
John Reeb, PhD, MBA • Full disclosure: My business is training Leaders & Managers.
Formal training as Brian defined it about mid-way down CAN absolutely improve
4/20
12/26/12
management & leadership skills. I see it every day! It's what I do.
Follow John
But what is required?
1. Training that meets all the senses (Auditory, Visual, Kinesthetic)
2. Honest interactions whether it be role playing, case studies, discussions, etc.
3. Accountability for follow up on the skills learned.
Included are such things as humor, activity, conflict & challenge.
Does that mean everyone will be the best manager around? Of course not, but each
person can (if they are willing to participate as above) be better than they were when they
came in. For some, it opens a whole new world where they end up being great managers.
Others, it's just slight improvement. (And yes, there are those who simply refuse to
participate. I fire them as soon as I realize I can't get them involved. But I don't normally
have to go there.)
2
Charlotte Weston-Horsmann • What is your definition of "ignorant employees" , Laura?
Follow Charlotte
Follow Georgi
Georgi Paleshnikov • The outstanding managers (call them leaders if you like) do not
have much time to provide formal training to other would-be great managers.
The only way to learn something about excellent management is to get somehow into
their team and see how they manage the company and behave in critical situations. Of
course, to get there you need to have something under the hat and someone has noticed
it. Or sometimes it's pure luck.
There is an old saying: "You cannot study a craft, you have to steal it somehow."
Follow Volente
1
Volente Morais • Formal training is a theoretical how to and may deal with how to
administratively be a manager. Being a manager is practical application that is learned
over time through the experience of the good, the bad and the ugly of management. As a
manager knowing enough about yourself and your principles in dealing with people lays a
good foundation for how you can establish your own route to effectively managing people.
Follow Julie Ann
Julie Ann West • I see management and leadership as different things for different
puposes that require a different skill set. Leadership invokes thoughts of inspiration, vision,
influence, innovation, and motivation. Management is monitoring, controlling, liasion,
negotiator, decisional, allocator, and leader with authority. Maybe all leaders can manage,
however all managers may not be good leaders.
Follow Marcus
2
Marcus Kottinger • Dear Gergi,
thanks for your comment I can only underline the whole paragraph. It's not enough to sit in
a class room an learn the important issue is that you are able to take also some hints or
behavier from others. In respect to the young leaders I guess the best approach in this
learning process is the saying: "Stay hungry, stay foolsih". I'm sure that I do not need to
tell you who used this approach very often.
Follow Dr. Alvin
H
Dr. Alvin H Steward III • Agreed Julie, I see leadership as the strategy focus process
and management as a transactional process dealing more with the day to day operation.
Both require different skill sets but a good manager and leader will know when to apply
each set of skills. The issue that is most commonly faced is a manager or leader who is
not effective at either and yet still trying to do both. So many people who should be
leading the organization is too busy with trying to manage the day to day operation (micro
management).
1
John Reeb, PhD, MBA • Volente, I have to disagree with you on a comment: "As a
manager knowing enough about yourself and your principles in dealing with people lays a
good foundation for how you can establish your own route to effectively managing people."
Follow John
I had a boss who understood himself very well and his principles. I happened to be in an
HR role at the time. We could not keep a woman employee because he "knew how they
liked to be treated." (And yes, that is a direct quote.) Knowing yourself and your principles
5/20
12/26/12
has no relationship to "effectively managing people." Only if they are GOOD principles
does it matter. And believe me, there are many, many out there that don't have that and
who run companies.
Follow Peter
1
Peter Fieger • As Minzberg suggested about a decade ago, an experienced manager will
learn to apply new ideas and tools, a technician may never learn to manage.... I
absolutely agree that education does not make a manager, but without the tools and
perspectives gained through formal management education it is hard to be a really good
manager!
1
Robert (Bob) Ringstrom • I believe that good management skills tend to be inherent,
socially developed qualities of the individual. That's not to say however, that most
everyone couldn't benefit from the training. How beneficial it will be ultimately lies with the
individual manager's commitment to apply his/her formal knowledge.
Follow Robert
(Bob)
Dr. Brian Monger • Bob, you are a coach and yet you say "That's not to say however,
that most everyone couldn't benefit from the training."?
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Follow John
John Schultz • It appears that some contributors to this site view leadership and
management as opposites. But in reality these situations are two sides of the same coin.
And as a coin, there is value that buys quite a lot. Flip it, and you can’t lose. It’s a win-win
toss-up. Each side, when skills are sufficient, will produce outcomes that are beneficial to
the enterprise and its stakeholders alike.
There are distinctions between leadership and management. Each position has its own
characteristics and functional activities, but these activities are related and
complementary arrangements for coordinating and controlling organizational operations.
Leaders typically operate at the top of a hierarchy and managers at lower levels. But that
doesn’t mean that managers aren’t capable leaders. In many cases managers have to be
leaders as well as coordinators and controllers of complex transactions.
John Kotter (1990) suggests the difference between management and leadership is
defined by specific but balancing activities. The following is summary and adaptation of his
thinking:
• Setting direction versus planning and budgeting. The leader develops a future purpose
and the accompanying strategies that will facilitate change toward the vision. Managers
set the intervening targets and goals, establish and sequence the action steps, and
allocate resources so that plans are achieved and in due course the organizations overall
purpose.
• Aligning people versus organizing and staffing. The leader brings people together—
workers and stakeholders—in a common and committed effort that is aimed at achieving
the organizations purpose or vision. This means communicating the intended purpose and
direction so that others understand what needs to be done and remain committed to its
achievement. Managers, on the other hand, create organizational structures capable of
accomplishing plan requirements, staff the appropriate jobs with qualified people, and
assign sufficient authority and responsibility to assure implementation is achieved.
• Inspiring people versus controlling and problem solving. The leader keeps people moving
in the right direction despite the obstacles and challenges by appealing to basic human
needs, values, and emotions. In this case the leader needs to set an example—walk the
talk—and create an atmosphere where people can participate by taking control of their
own destiny. Managers, conversely, need to empower others and create an environment
where the workforce is willing to take risks and make decisions. In addition, managers
must create control mechanisms that can monitor results and signal when corrective
action and problem solving are needed so effort remains focused on short-term results and
the long-term vision.
Yes, managers and leaders do have different responsibilities, but their roles are not
exclusive. They are joined in a mutual and beneficial relationship where leaders drive
change and managers control complexity. This however, doesn’t mean that managers and
supervisors are not sufficiently expert to be leaders. Quite the opposite, these individuals
are leaders at their own level and should be able to act with the same Profound
Knowledge that an effective chief executive has.
2
Dr. Alvin H Steward III • I agree John, and we find ourselves acting in both roles on a
6/20
12/26/12
regular basis, switching back and forth as needed.
Follow Dr. Alvin
H
Dr. Brian Monger • Well said John
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Follow Sarah Jie
Sarah Jie Wang • It depends. I want to mention an artical called Bad Management
Theories are Destroying Good Management Practices by Ghoshal (2005), which might be
relevant to this topic. Formal management training is generally designed based on
management theories, which have a set of negative and pessimistic assumptions on
human nature. Manager's behavior can be influenced and even dominated by these
unrealistic and biased assumptions. For example, managers are more likely to avoid the
agency problem as they assume agency problem exists. What if this problem was
eliminate by the mutual trust or healthy relationship. Ghoshal stated that the training and
education of management would have significant but negative impacts on managers'
behavior.
Dr. Brian Monger • Sarah
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Re: "Formal management training is generally designed based on management theories,
(OK with that bit) ....
which have a set of negative and pessimistic assumptions on human nature. Manager's
behavior can be influenced and even dominated by these unrealistic and biased
assumptions.
I am unaware that management theories are based on "a set of negative and pessimistic
assumptions on human nature"
AND
I disagree with them being "unrealistic and biased assumptions."
In the paper you reference, by Goshal, He said that management theories"have done
much to stengthen the management practices we are now condemming.
The paper was largely focused on amoral practices in business.
Follow Tracy
Tracy Letch MBA Saint Mary's College Moraga • Hi John, thanks for referencing Kotter
(one of my favorites) if it sounds like I distinguised one from the other it was a mistake
(too brief maybe) I like what you have to say and I agree. One person I like to think of as
inspirational, a good business leader/manager and charismatic (although I never met him)
is one of the founders of Whole Foods~ know who I am talking about- I like his blog, and I
think one in particular worth mentioning (believe it's called) Conscious Capitalism-Creating
a New Paradigm for business
Here is the link
http://www.wholeplanetfoundation.org/files/uploaded/John_MackeyConscious_Capitalism.pdf
Safia Syed • There is always room to learn more. But the assessment of the area the
training is needed for a particular manager is really important.
Follow Safia
Follow Georgi
Georgi Paleshnikov • Further to my previous comment a few hours ago, I do not imply
that management theory is useless. As Safia said before me "There is always room to
learn more."
But if someone is really keen to be a good manager he would intuitively guess where are
his weak sides as he compares him-/herself with good managers. There are enough
books and resources on the internet worth reading, in order to improve oneself in every
possible direction. It all depends on the individual: if there is a wish he/she will always find
a way.
But books & training are not always enough (please refer to my previous comment).
7/20
12/26/12
Sandeep Muwal • Does formal Management Training produce better managers?
Follow Sandeep
If you are asking about 'Formal Management Training' than in my opinion 'YES'.
Yes formal better management training produce better managers. The results of training
will be fruitful in every test if the trainer and student both are having a sound set of
objectives and practice while the training time period.
In my life I have studied & learned many management books but the actual ''Applicability
& Practice" (of all those management concepts, theories and models etc.) was learned at
the professional training and actual field work & research.
'During training' and after that at the 'Actual field work' the candidate gets an exposure
about his/her positive and negative points. He or she get to know about himself, about the
work, how to work with senior and subordinates? How to be update with demands? etc.
So in last, Dr. Brian Monger sir, if even after the 'training' people are failing to become a
good manager than I think those were in a wrong training session and they should
reorganize objectives of professional life.
Thank you for your time sir.
With best regards,
Sandeep Muwal
Tan Kok Leong • The answer depends on four questions. What kind of training you are
talking about ? Secondly what kind of company you are talking about? Thirdly, what kind
of people under training you are talking about? and the fourth question probably is what
kind of circumstances you are talking about?
Follow Tan
Dr. Brian Monger • Tan, We are not actually seeking an answer to a question based on
a specific situation, but rather looking at ideas and opinions based on a concept - so there
is no real need to have those answers here.
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Follow Clemence
But I guess you could contribute by expanding on each
Clemence Moyo • The question is " Does formal Management Training produce better
managers?" The answer is an unequivocal "Yes". As long as we agree that management
is a science based on some known theory then one must go through some prescribed
training programe to gain proficiency. The case studies, role plays and assignments that
students/participants undertake during the training programme are meant to potray a real
life situation which would be encountered at the work place. Experience is then built on
practice and the two are different sides of the same coin(borrowing from John). Most of the
behaviours referred to in this discussion are well resarcehed and known and it is this
knowlege that one uses in the workplace to solve managerial problems. While it is
accepted that management as a social science may have many answers to to one
problem depending on the interpretter, the foundation of good management remains well
grounded theory based on sound training.
Neil Ribeiro • Being a product of the McDonald's Management Training program, I must
say that there are many things that I do / mentor to others, that I learnt in that program.
Follow Neil
Follow Yodit
Yodit Fantahun • I think management trainings are significant to refine practical
knowledge as long as they are run on the right software. And I believe the right software
(management capabilities) are inherent and not necessarily learnt. It requires virtues that
can not be easily derived from courses, especially when it comes to the delicate issue HR management.
1
Thembisile Molose • Sometimes it depends what kind of training, who offered the
training. this tells us that some people maybe good managers without formal training while
the latter is also possible.
Follow
Thembisile
8/20
12/26/12
Follow Marzieh
Marzieh Djadidi • It depends.Good managers are people that have analytic,
communicating and reflecting mind set. In this point of view, they are able to change to
whether a formal or informal way of management, based on the situation and their
business nature. I believe that formal Management Training, is not the cause of managing
better, but it is related to prestige .
1
John Schultz • This response is in defense of those individuals who feel training can
include self-study and on-the-job experiences that are mostly observational. Learning is
learning regardless of its source. It’s the outcome that counts, and in many cases we
judge adequacy by assigning an assessment of good or bad.
Follow John
Leaders—for centuries—have been rallying people to greater accomplishment—to win
wars, build empires, and of course complete the mundane rigors of day-to-day work. It
seems the world has been able to produce leaders sufficient to match almost every
challenge. Certainly there has been enough written on the topic. Libraries catalog and
shelve numerous titles devoted to its practice. Anyone interested in becoming a leader
can—through effort—promote herself or himself by employing what is already known.
The ability to apply these skills is of course dependent upon situational and emotional
factors—the group’s needs and circumstances, and the individual leader’s capability and
good judgment. Leaders through training, experience, or personal aptitude are able to get
others to achieve results that are deemed desirable by both leader and followers.
1
Endi Kustamsi • FORMAL EDUCATION or Training is very important, BUT if you want to
create a so called "Good Managers", then there is one MORE IMPORTANT thing, you
MUST bring them to GEMBA LEARNING (please refer to Modern Mgmt vs Lean Mgmt in
the book titled "Gemba Walks" by James P. Womack, Ph.D).
Follow Endi
Mohamed R Patel • Formal training is essential implementation and execution are key
components!
Follow Mohamed
R
Oleg Gorodnitskiy • What is that "formal" training for? for whom? and why now?
Here is an interesting debate about MBA education (http://previewdebates.economist.com/debate/days/view/901):
Follow Oleg
Prof. Mintzberg's position is that companies see an MBA as a substitute for experience.
As a result they fast track business-school graduates before they have learned the
lessons of real-world management, which is to the detriment of both firms and the
economy.
Paul Danos, (Dean, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College), however, says that
while the tools learned on an MBA programme give employees the advantage over peers
who lack that knowledge, they still pay their dues in the workplace before reaching the
top.
2
Oleg Gorodnitskiy • "Changing education paradigms" by RSA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U
Follow Oleg
Follow Martin
Martin Birt • Brian, One of my most memorable and enjoyable assignments included
responsibility for our management development workshops. Let's think about the variables
that influence the success of training initiative:
> the participants (especially their readiness for training)
> their managers (Have these senior managers selected and prepared their candidates?
Will the senior managers provide opportunities to exercise new skills and will the seniors
provide feedback?)
> the material
> the alignment of the material with the organizations culture and methods
> the facilitator(s), and
> the training environment.
Let's define success:
> We are successful if managers learn some tools, models and frameworks for thinking. >
9/20
12/26/12
We are successful if common values are emphasized and practiced.
> We are successful if participants leave with a shared language.
> We are successful if the group of participants becomes another supportive network.
> We are successful if managers are provided the opportunities to exercise these
outcomes.
If we focus on the variables and desired outcomes, then yes, formal training can produce
better managers.
2
Alfredo Carrera B. • As Olga Piehler infers, learning occurs only when there is a change
of behavior.
Management is a blend of hard and soft competences. Thus, having hard competences is
key, but not enough, as practically all of the above comments.
Follow Alfredo
Dr. Brian Monger • Great input Martin
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Dr. Brian Monger • Alfredo - learning occurs before change.
Change is the implementation of learning.
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
I can learn something, remember it and perhaps implement it at a later date. From the
implementation I will learn more.
2
Dr. Brian Monger • Oleg, As much as I usually admire Mintzberg and Danos, I find both
arguments simplistic and way over generalised.
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Do you actually have a problem with understanding the general concept of what I was
referring to when I said "formal Management Training" in the Discussion question?
Georgi Paleshnikov • With all these propositions for formal training and all sorts of
courses, when do you think these learned managers will start to manage something right,
as it has to be?
Please, indicate a value in months, years or decades.
Follow Georgi
Follow Alfredo
Alfredo Carrera B. • To avoid the discussion about semantics, let me explain myself in
another way. We go through phases:
- Unconscious incompetence.
- Conscious incompetence.
- Conscious competence.
- Unconscious competence.
- Conscious unconscious competence.
Most of us stay in the conscious competence stage, which is what you call learning or
what I call knowledge. Being in conscious competence does not mean that the behavior
has changed and that the knowledge is entrenched within us, like driving, or cycling. That
happens when we are at the unconscious competence stage.
Having hard competences is important for management, but not enough, we need to
incorporate what we learn permanently, and apart from that, have the soft competences,
or emotional intelligence, necessary to lead.
3
Oleg Gorodnitskiy • With all due respect, Dr. Brian, your Discussion question is also
quite general. I think that training (formal or not) can be very effective, as long as it is
carefully designed for a specific audience, at the right time and at the right place. At any
rate, based on your post, it seems that your position is closer to Mintzberg's view.
Follow Oleg
Dr. Brian Monger • Thank you for the "due respect" Oleg.
10/20
12/26/12
Of course it is quite general. I wrote it to be that way, on purpose.
1
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Oleg Gorodnitskiy • Alfredo! You are right: "walking the path is the path"!
Dr. Brian, learning is change, change is learning. Wouldn't you agree?
Follow Oleg
Dr. Brian Monger • Oleg, refer to my comment above re change.
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Of course people learn (and others assist them to do so) usually to gain information and
convert that to knowledge. Perhaps (but not always) change is a desired outcome. As a
result some change does occur. At very least we have more information.
This does not mean that further change will occur in the short term - or even the long term.
Whenever there is a change in a person's behavior, it indicates some learning has
occurred (assuming the change is not the result of a physical occurance.
It does not mean that good change has occured either
Follow Robert
1
Robert Jensen AIMM, MAIPM • @Georgi P
How long is a piece of string ?
Let me come at your question in another way, what are you prepared to do to support
your managers in training to ensure the transfer is timed and effective ?
Are you engaged in the process, or would you say OK you are trained now, off you go,
Manage !
Do your managers have mentors, or networks of peers. Do they know how to create and
join them ?
In other words training is not a guarantee in any instance, but what is guaranteed is if a
manager in training has the FULL support of their sponsoring employer, the training is way
more likely to transfer into operations timely and effectively, and in a way which fits the
culture of the organisation.
1
Aditya Madiraju (8884948072) • Hi Georgi,
Season's greetings!
Follow Aditya
My experience is that most formal management trainings (including inhouse analytics
practitioners) usually underestimate the time and energy required to cajole a "business
person" to stand up & raise a hand.
I realize fear of failure is overwelmingly stronger than curiosity.
Regards,
aditya
Georgi Paleshnikov • Dear Robert,
Follow Georgi
thanks for your comment. As already seen from my comments above, I am not against
the formal training in general.
I have had in my experience as an employee and as a manager I have always tried to
provide full support to the employees if they need training in anything. But what makes
you a good expert on something or a good manager is the real job and the initiatives you
take.
If you give it a thought you can never be fully prepared for everything and it's the creativity
which saves the day at the end. What matters most is the inner drive to improvement and
perfection which makes someone a good manager, not the amount of formal training he
receives.
By the way, going too often to training & seminars is a good excuse to transfer a few
assignments to colleagues in the company. Someone has to do the job at the end.
Ibukun Adebayo FBCS, CITP, Cert.IoD, ACSI • Focused management trainng in
11/20
12/26/12
specialist disciplines may produce better functional managers, e.g. financial managers,
account managers etc.
Follow Ibukun
Adebayo
On the other hand, I'd suggest that leadership training doesn't necessarily produce better
leaders. Evolving into an authentic leader comes through mentorship, experience, and
self-awareness, in my view.
3
John Schultz • It seems that many of the contributors to this conversation are engaged in
leadership and management training of one sort or another. Some of the contention over
definitions and approaches appears to be driven by the models that guide individual
teaching and coaching.
Follow John
But as I indicated previously, all management training has merit in somebody’s thinking,
but some programs are more useful than others. And the only way to establish adequacy
is to define what the expectations are. As the case may be, what are competencies that
describe sufficient management or leadership? What should a manager know? Some
participants have already indicated Mintzberg’s view as defining, while others cite
Maxwell’s ideas, or even the notion of Gemba as a guiding philosophy.
Training has to have rigorous and actionable objectives. Otherwise any curriculum can be
deemed appropriate. And certainly there are many programs available that are nothing
more than popularized and wistful notions with little merit, but do a good job of packing
somebody’s wallet.
1
Jim Carwardine • So many responses... Hard to nail down a complete answer to the
question asked as evidenced by all the responses.
Follow Jim
Adults learn best in an action learning setting where their current problem is mulled over
by the circle, action is prescribed and progress reported on at the next meeting. Is that
"formal"... not sure. Leadership is relative to the environment where the interaction
between the boss, the job and the team dictates the next leadership step, sometimes
towards a known objective but many times, the objective is obscure and the process is
the object. In a world of fast moving pieces, leadership is sometimes relative, different
people assuming the role at different times. It an operational activity. Formality, best
practices, written procedures, etc. are mostly historical by definition and irrelevant in a
learning environment if they can't be modified on the fly by people who are responsible and
accountable for what they do. A white board, a group of diverse people and a reason to be
there are the tools of true training. Formal?, yes, I think...
David Fuller • I believe that formal training provides an individual with the basic tools
however, just a with any other type of work skills, experience is the key.
Follow David
Ashok Kacker • I believe the issue is does formal management training ( read MBA)
produce better managers.
Check this out.
Follow Ashok
http://www.mintzberg.org/book/managers-not-mbas
I agree with this even though I am an MBA
1
Benny Cohen • I believe that format education may enhance management skills.
However traits such as leadership, being able to distinguish between important and
urgent, good people relations are natural and come with experience
1
Follow Benny
Follow
Ramkumar
Ramkumar Ganesan • Management is necessary in day-to-day life. A formal training is
good but we need to understand if that training takes care of the current needs. We are
now talking about more of self-governance, owning the responsibility, motivation, and team
play. However, the management training structure has not changed enough to support
this. We need to define a better management educational system to get the best out of it.
That is why natural leaders succeed today than just a management grad.
1
12/20
12/26/12
Follow Graham
Graham Gifford • Dr. Brian, clearly you have asked a question that many people have an
opinion on. Your question is as multi-facted as the responses you received. Like Kevin, I
have worked with highly educated managers that were completely ineffective and I have
worked with others that did not have a formal education and were most effective. The work
place is changing far too quickly for any of us not to taking the time to increase and grow
our skill set, however, what defines a formal education. I do not know whether a "formal"
education is as critical as it once was. I find the opinions stating that a formal education
manifests technical skills, interesting. That was the one biggest fault that the poor
managers exhibited -they had no people skills. They lacked the understanding of the
human element. While I agree, in part, with Maria, great management skills are
developed, but what do we consider to be "great" skills? That's a question for another
time...
1
Faisal Mahmood • A Robot cannot do the management.Some lands are barren and
some are fertile.So formal training may be all in vain, a little beneficial or extremely
beneficial.
Follow Faisal
Follow Ozzie E
Ozzie E Paez • As I read through the numerous comments, they illustrate how
different “management” is defined within different contexts.
Organizational size and scope, structure
(flat vs. hierarchical), technology, operational environment (government,
non-profit, profit) and other factors give specific meaning to the term.
Finally, perspective is important because
training has different value for the individual being trained and the
organization paying for the training.
With the above in mind, whether and to what degree training
is beneficial would have to be equally contextual. Formal management
training can contribute to
management growth, but there is no guarantee and may not be the best
strategy
when considered from the organization’s point of reference. From
experience, companies with effective
training and development programs matched individual background and
demonstrated performance to training and future expectations. Later on,
employees had more flexibility in
pursuing individual interests, but by then, they would have demonstrated
their
value to the organization and held the promise of greater returns in the
future. So, in essence, there is no
specific answer to the question, other than ‘depends.’
2
Marcus Kottinger • Dear Ashok,
thanks for sharing this book hint. I guess this is not only an issue for management
positions. In our country the economy will much more suffer by the lack of qualified and
educated employees although we have a high immigration rate.
Follow Marcus
ron baca • Having recently received my MBA in Management after a 30+ year C-level
executive career (reverse order), I believe knowledge (training) coupled with experience
may illuminate the way for managers to manage. Experience without training leaves
excuses as to why management inefficiencies exist.
Follow ron
1
Dr. Brian Monger • We have had a few comments suggesting that formal management
training needs to be good. What would it include that perhaps is not commonly there
now?
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Follow Wynne
Wynne Price • Brian, we need to have, and to continue to promote, the strategic links
between the training and the organisational requirements. There must also be follow-up
between the trainee and their manager, within strategic framework. That is, the trainee's
manager needs to have an excellent grasp of "how this training brings benefit to both the
trainee and the organisation?" and to regularly and consistently follow up with the trainee.
13/20
12/26/12
Wynne Price • ron baca congratulations. Your management experience must have been
supported by your academic studies, as well as being extremely useful in class
discussions.
Follow Wynne
Follow Clemence
Clemence Moyo • I liked Graham's line of thinking. In my third contribution to this
discussion I raised the issue that many issues that are raised in this discussion as
obtained outside formal training are in essence part of formal manageent training. Most
MBA programmes are meant to be as extensive as possible to inculcate a wide range of
knowledge and therefore produce a complete manager with skills in leadership, human
capital management, finance, entrpreneurship and other issues that many people seem to
suggest they can only be obtained outside formal training. Experience develops from
applying taught priciples in the work place repeatedly which increasese proficency. I am
not sure how anyone can honestly advance the arguement that formal training is not
important because most people are what they are beccause of formal trainng . The issue
of incompetent trained managers should not distract us as it applies accross all
phenonmenon and is amply described by the normal distribution curve. You will have few,
useless trained managers, a majority average performers and a feww highfliers.I
questioned why many people believe that management does not require the same level of
training to obtaina proficiency like other areas of business such as Operational and
Financial management, engineering and medicinee. Perhaps the question to ask now is
"What is it that we call management?"
Follow Clemence
Clemence Moyo • Ashok, Professor Henry Minztberg has always spiced management
teaching and thinking questioning its completeness. He questioned the fact that
managers performed the four functions of planning, organising, leading and coordinating
and introduced the concept of managerials roles. In strategy he questioned the fact that
strategic management was structured and followed a definite plan and introduced the
concept of emergent strategy. In the article you made reference to, he says MBA
programmes should not be for youngsters but for experienced managers. What is correct
about his thiking in the three examples is that he points out a fundamental weakness in
mangement approach which is that we tend to take a casual approach without subjecting
issues to rigourous analysis to check their completeness. This unfortunately may be the
role of scholarship instead of management. If one attends graduate school after practising
management, most misconceptions and myths about management will definitely be
cleared during the study programme and a better manager will be produced.
1
Ramkumar Ganesan • All reputed B Schools accept students with experience. Good.
However, if we say management is a profession, then the MBAs also need to be given a
license and they need to go through continuous education and credits to stay alive.
Follow
Ramkumar
I am not sure how many of the world’s leading B Schools have psychology and political
science as part of their curriculum.
How many of them give real life experience eon best practice, technology perspective,
strategic finance, dealing with human emotions and so on?
What do they do to inculcate the values of being fair and honest?
How many certified MBAs in their current role define motivational factors, productivity,
transparency, respect for human being, tolerance to culture and opposite views, being
objective?
We need to understand many things before just only speak about formal training.
Follow Clemence
1
Clemence Moyo • A fact of real life is that no one person can encounter everything in
one life.No one manager therefore encounters all the areas studied at college in real life.
Management is a very broad area and cannot be expected to cover every facet of
business. It is also correct that everyone will encounter something new in life but a
properly trained manager will undesrtand how to obtain expert knowledge inside or outside
the organisation. There are professionals in every area of endeavour. I am not sure whether
there are MBA programmes that do not cover best practice, productivity, strategic finance,
culture and motivation? Granted there are very good untrained managers but they are a
minority and exceptions to the general rule. An MBA will provide the essential tools of
management which can be applied accross industries. Technical management of
functional areas is provided by specialists in those areas. The purpose of an MBA or any
other management training programme is to provide the major tools of the
descipline/profession. The MBAprogramme I attended was extensive covering 22 taught
courses which by and large covered most of the issues covered by Ramkumar. Most
MBAs programmes enrol students with a first degree in any area, the assumption being
that those students would want to manage businesses in their industries.
14/20
12/26/12
Georgi Paleshnikov • Good point, Ramkumar! An institution, issuing certificate/diploma
for MBA, should be tracked (or licensed as you said) based on what its students achieve
as managers in, let's say, 5-7 years after graduation. I would not elaborate on how to do
that here.
Follow Georgi
Formal training/education is just a test for someone to see if he would like to further do
what he studied and solve the eventual issues/problems which would arise. It's the inner
drive from this moment on, which would make someone a good manager.
And this inner drive will give the direction for further education/training/etc. based on what
one feels is necessary to improve.
2
Linda Nolan • Georgi
Follow Linda
I like the concept of a study that analyses the outcomes of training, so long as the data
collected over the years is comprehensive enough to leave all possible outcomes and
conclusions open.
So, for example, it may not be wise to assume that, in a longitudinal study, the markers
for success will be similar to those of today.
Feedback from me, from observation of MBA graduates at close hand in diverse
organisations, is that MBA standards vary so much, depending on the awarding institution
combined with the experience and aptitude of the graduate, that the qualification is
meaningless on its own.
As many others have commented, you can lead a horse to water etc....
A very poor manager, who may have achieved their position through political, rather than
real ability, can still write good theory and talk wisely about successful workplace projects
that succeeded through someone else's efforts. Many others simply fail to understand that
knowing how to manage is nothing like being a good leader or manager in practice. These
are common derailers in any company. The only kind of formal management training that
spurs and helps them to change is that which which is driven by top level analysis,
feedback and interaction with real events in the workplace. This may include MBA or other
formal training.
So many top achievers understand good practice instinctively and through their natural
analytical and people skills. They prove that formal learning is not the only route, just an
extra learning option.
Follow Ozzie E
3
Ozzie E Paez • Linda - You make excellent points. There are vast differences between
the training needs of fairly inexperienced individuals and those who have managed, led,
started businesses, etc. The value of formal training such as that offered by MBA
programs varies greatly with the institution doing the training and the individual receiving it.
In today's fast paced economy, many of the skills needed are evolving much faster than
academia can possibly analyze, absorb and turn into new teaching materials, curriculum
content, etc., so what experienced managers need and what is offered in such formal
environments may not overlap so well and, just as important, may take too long to have a
measurable impact on the issues being faced by the organization paying for the training.
There are many management development programs being offered by Harvard, Notre
Dame and other institutions with narrower, more up to date, targeted instruction, which
can deliver great value. The University of San Francisco, for example, offered a marketing
program focusing on the Internet and Social Media, whose content was current and
relevant. It just so happened that I was taking some MBA classes that included
marketing, which focused on how it was done in the 1980s and 90s. The text books were
dated to that timeframe as well. Anyway, in today’s environment, there are options that
can deliver direct, relevant value more timely than traditional programs. That does not
mean that traditional programs are useless, they do serve a purpose, but it does raise
questions as to the value that companies should expect by paying for different types of
management development training.
Linda Nolan • Yes, Ozzie
Follow Linda
Watching with interest how those open access, online, courses being offered by some of
the world's top Universities evolve and pan out. It will be useful to see how the cost-benefit
equation works out for these strategies.
From a base in HR, the focus must be on demonstrable ROI for any Leadership or
Management Development initiatives and responses. That always means the most
perfectly tailored solutions for the company, taking into account our Global marketplace.
It's not about cost per unit of training; that is very yesterday. It's about measurable impact
15/20
12/26/12
on the Company bottom line; present and future.
For Management, Leadership and Talent Development, the most interesting approaches
I'm seeing combine innovative Research methodologies with very intelligent technology.
This works via continuous feedback loop, generating agile learning and training responses,
right through the Customer, Company and Employee matrix.
By the way, talking of bottom lines and cost centres; sponsoring an Employee to do MBA
or other formal programme, is often not so much about Learning and Development as
about Reward and Retention.
Follow Ozzie E
Ozzie E Paez • Linda: As input, I took an eight week executive course in Advanced
Intercultural Management that contributed much to expanding my awareness of the
issues, methods of assessment and tools for continuously expanding understanding. It
was highly focused, hands on and practical, with participation from others in a range of
industries across the world. These types of courses, in my view, can deliver short to long
term returns. More importantly, the selection of courses can be aligned with the needs
and goals of individual managers and others in the HR development process.
Follow Binod
2
Binod Atreya, Ph.D • Agreed with Linda and Ozzie. Formal courses like MBA offers
ground for an individual to enter the job market, a platform for them to test whether learned
knowledge can be implemented in the organization or not. The real organization situation
is quite different. The socio cultural, political environment, with people of different
background and personalities, and the inherent official bureaucracy, with operational
management practices which are distinct than the theories, make organizational
environment quite different and challenging. Therefore, experience deserve a great value in
decision making system and developing great managers. Formal training offers upgrading
individual knowledge and skills and a point to compare what other have been doing
significantly different than the one we are doing.
Follow Ozzie E
Ozzie E Paez • Binod - A key differentiator today is the constant state of change
affecting organizations. Perhaps your company wants to enter new markets
and the cultural skill sets and relations, important in the new market, are
lacking in the sales force; or new foreign competition enters the market
driving product value towards commoditization; or new technologies suddenly
threaten how the company has been doing busines... Leading, managing and
making decisions in these environments is challenging and requries
individuals to upgrade their skill sets, sometimes on their own and
sometimes through more formal training.
Follow
Mashanka
Mashanka Chahal • Personally, I won't typecast 'formally trained managers' as inferior or
superior in their management & leadership style. I strongly consider 'management training'
as yet another platform that equips a professional with the necessary tools in the box.
Now whether that formally trained manager decides to use those tools appropriately and
to their advantage or NOT is completely his/her prerogative & wisdom. Bad management
should not be a reflection of bad training. Over the years, I have learnt to separate people
from their problems and it has helped and to me this scenario isn't any different ... Now
thats my take on this subject !
2
Clemence Moyo • Brilliant piece Mashanka!
9 days ago • Like
Follow Clemence
Follow Teck Kim
Teck Kim Khoo • I see management training as being part of the process for an individual
to become a manager. It provides the necessary educational background and certain
topical studies to enrich the individual together with practical benchmarks and guidelines.
However, much depends on the individual since management training does not always
provide all the lessons to be a good manager.
Personally, theoretical knowledge cannot replace practical experience and this is one of
the major differences between average managers and excellent mnagers. The knowledge
one gains from formal management training does not mould one to be a good manager. It
has to be combined with practical experience and know-how which will then add value to
organisations.
Much also depends on the individual's traits...like possessing a positive attitude, good
inter-personal and communication skills, a flair for developing people, team player, good
16/20
12/26/12
leadership skills, etc. These characteristics when combined with management training will
develop effective managers for organisations.
9 days ago • Like
Follow Ozzie E
1
Ozzie E Paez • Teck - Interpersonal and communication skills, development of your core
team, working well with others and even leadership skills can be taught and
developed. I would say that these are among the first set of skills that
new supervisors and managers should demonstrate and, if they lack them,
organizations would do well to send them for training. The same applies to
decision-making skills at every level of the organization. This is one
area where I focus and know can deliver good returns on investments. In
today's fast paced environment, keeping these skills up to date can make a
significant impact on the organization's performance, key employee
retention, human development, agility and adaptability. From experience,
I've come to realize that these areas overlap the formal training of
academia and the hands on training found in On The Job Training and similar
programs.
9 days ago • Like
Follow Kier
Kier O'Neil, PMP, CSM • My company has management training at all levels. If you get
promoted then you are expected to complete that level's training within a certain amount
of time. The knowledge that it conveys is beneficial but not as important as providing a
consistency across all managers at that level. The real benefit is that workers can expect
all managers at that level to act and react in a similar manner. I cannot overstate how nice
this is. In other companies that I have been involved in each manager could have
completely different ways of dealing with the same situation and the learning curve was
prohibitive for the people that had to interact with them.
9 days ago • Like
Follow Judy
Judy Kaylor • You can provide training.
You cannot guarantee the learner has learned and is able to transfer the learning into
meaningful actions.
All training needs assessments (pre and post) and in the situation of
supervisory/managemetn training, link the supervisory behaviors to the performance plan.
9 days ago • Like
Follow Michael
Michael MacNeil Sr. • I'm the worst manager I have ever met! But! I have managed to
survive in Business for 28 years. I have learned to LISTEN to other's,get advise from
people who have done it. Not a self help book. if You want to be a Fireman, hang out with
Firemen. If you want to be in Finance hang out with Bankers. If you want have a profitable
business! Hire a great Manager! And let them manage. Find one who is educated,
polished and that you can trust and enjoy his company, Because You are going to spend
a lot of time together. This is coming from mistake's I have made. and the less mistake's
you make the more money you will have in your jean's. a vary wealthy friend of mine in the
Oil biz told me something about myself one day. "Michael, you have make a lot of money
in the construction business! Now you have to learn to keep some.
8 days ago • Like
Follow Diana
1
1
Diana Leach • I concur that good management results from a combination of inherent
traits, experience, and good training/education. I want to add something else not
mentioned specifically yet. One of the many reasons that I chose to get a graduate
management degree is that I wanted to be able to "speak the language" of management
with those upper level managers and their subordinates. People are more at ease with
someone who "understands" without definitions and explanations. Made quite a difference
for me.
8 days ago • Like
3
Dr. Brian Monger • Diana, what do you describe as "inherent" traits?
8 days ago • Like
1
Dr. Brian
Unfollow
Follow Charles
Charles Wolfe • I seem to be late to this forum but I have a few thoughts to share that
haven't been written yet that may help to make the case for management training. First
like many others I agree that much that happens in a training session is often lost in most
organizations. Second though, I had the experience of working with two very successful
organizations that did management training that worked very well.
17/20
12/26/12
Many years ago I worked at Harvard Business School's Executive Program for
Management Development. I did some research to determine the effectiveness of this
program by surveying executives that had participated six months after it had ended for
them. I found that when functional managers had come into the program knowing that
when they returned to their companies they were returning to become general managers,
the program was amazingly successful in helping them prepare. However, one executive
that went back to his old job as a chief financial officer spoke about the experience in a
way that captured what many felt. He said he felt like Charly, the man in the movie that
came from the story Flowers of Algernon. He felt like he had been a very unintelligent
human being before coming to Harvard's program. When he left he felt like he had been
given the gift of genius. However, when he returned to his old job he felt all the new
learning slipping away. So the moral to the story, context is incredibly important to
learning being transferred from a classroom to a workplace.
Second, I left Harvard to work at Exxon. Exxon was amazing in the way they developed
their people. There were constant conversations about every leader at all levels regarding
what was the next best developmental move for each individual. Tied to this were specific
weeklong management programs for those promoted into supervisory, first and second
level management roles. In each of these weeklong programs, some internal person like
myself was the key facilitator and we were partnered with two high potential plant
managers who resided with us for the week, attended every session and gave
presentations of their own. It was an amazing experience and because these plant
managers were people that every participant looked up to, these courses were extremely
powerful and people definitely learned how to lead. On the other hand, I worked for an
insurance company where we had week long management classes for general managers
of regional offices along with corporate managers. We also received a partner to work with.
In one telling instance the person sent to work with us was on probation with the company
and many of the GMs knew about it. And while the content of the program may have been
just as good as what was taught at Exxon, the symbolism of having an executive on
probation to co-facilitate with made the experience far less valuable. Again context is
incredibly important for the transference of learning to take place.
Warm regards,
Chuck Wolfe
8 days ago • Like
Follow Samantha
Samantha Sutton • I believe outcomes of management training need to be addressed
before arguing whether formal management training produces better managers.
Management can be defined as "the process of dealing with or controlling things or
people." Therefore, is a training outcome to train people to become better "controllers"? I
prefer the synonyms for management and liken these to the journey people should take to
become better managers… administration -> direction -> conduct -> leadership. Bring
back humanistic qualities and outcomes in management training. Create leaders who
innovate, take risks and stretch boundaries, not limit managers to confined tools or
frameworks.
8 days ago • Like
Follow Michael
1
2
Michael MacNeil Sr. • I thirst for knowledge! You have to excuse Me, I'm not a Collage
grad. I dropped out of high school in grade nine. And i'm Dyslexic. Not severe but enough
to dampen my learning at a young age. Great vision, self taught master at math, but not
so good on the language arts. I have a real thirst for the law, and that is a inherent trait,
my biological Father's people were Lawyer's ( O'Connors ) . And Chuck,What is the
meaning of context?
8 days ago • Like
Derek Brand • This is a very interesting topic Brian which is bound to polarise the
readers. My view is that formal training does make a manager better but only in half of the
required skills for being a successful manager and only if co-existing with some strong
personal/professional attributes.
Follow Derek
Management covers an exceptionally wide variety of roles from supervising an automated
product line through middle management to Cx roles. As we consider some of these roles
the required skills tend to be quite different; for instance the product line manager may
require high level subject matter expertise (SME) which will be highly specific to the
company and product and almost certainly requiring years of experiential learning with
management training unlikely to add significant value.
As one moves into middle management responsibilities and therefore required skills tend
to broaden; people management, stakeholder management, performance management
etc. It is often this step that organisations fail to consider as a substantial step instead
thinking that a strong SME will make a great middle manager but forgetting the dramatic
difference in responsibilities and required skills which is a great time to consider formal
management training.
Implicit in the skills required for these roles is a combination of frameworks that could be
applied that others have referred to as a ‘toolkit’ and could be assisted by tertiary training
but also personal attributes; people skills, professionalism, leadership, vision,
communication, personal and professional improvement etc. People can seek to build and
improve these while skills others are born with them and can polish them but each
18/20
12/26/12
requires self-awareness and determination.
Finally as one moves into executive management roles the subject matter expertise of the
field starts to lessen while the subject matter expertise of the executive role starts to
increase; strategy, operations, finance, marketing, HR etc. In my view these can also be
learned however formal management training from a strong tertiary institution does provide
a broad base ‘toolkit’, that affords the individual a range of ways to deal with issues rather
than perhaps one or two tried and true techniques, this can make their skills more
portable between companies and industries. If the institution harnesses both theoretical
knowledge and the widely varied knowledge and application of the students (especially in
part-time and executive courses) then this can deliver highly applicable, transportable and
practical tools. That said, I still think that while these roles require a stronger ‘toolkit’ this
does not take away from the importance of those personal attributes mentioned
previously.
In summary a management leader who can employ those personal professional attributes
authentically while also having the depth of both formal training and experiential
application of their ‘toolkit’ is likely to be a very successful manager. However a manager
without those personal attributes is probably unlikely to be receptive to new learning
irrespective of formal or experiential and managerial success may be limited.
8 days ago • Like
Charles Wolfe • Hi Michael,
Follow Charles
The way I use context relates to the question "Does formal management training produce
better managers." In the case of the Harvard Executive Program for Management
Education the answer is "yes" if the person being educated is going back to a new
challenge where they can apply all the general management skills they are learning.
When the person goes back to a situation where they cannot use the skills they have
learned then the answer is "no" they will not become better managers.
In the Exxon situation the addition of a high potential manager to the weekly management
training sessions sends a signal to all attendees that the week, and what they are
learning, is very important. So for these participants they work very hard to learn the
content and the answer again is yes, these participants do become better managers. In
the case of the insurance company, the fact that they sent an executive who was on
probation to attend sends a signal to participants that this week of learning is not
important, and so the participants are much less likely to value what they are learning,
and therefore they, at least many of them, do not become better managers.
So what I meant by context is that the circumstances involving the training make a big
difference in terms of how you answer the question "Does formal management training
produce better managers?" In some cases "yes" and in other circumstances "no".
8 days ago • Like
1
Ann Houston • I see the positive results of management training daily. It provides
confidence in individuals to use their own natural and new strategies in managing teams
and organisations. It increases awareness of aspects that learners hadn't been conscious
of - whether through lack of exposure or their own behavioral traits and 'blind spots'.
Follow Ann
In effective facilitation of training interactions, significant peer learning will occur,
capitalising on the diverse experience within the class. Additionally it is reassuring for
learners to see that others face similar challenges.
An organisation that invests in training sends a strong cultural message, internally and
externally, that continuous improvement is a foundation value. For some attendees,
training will be a catalyst for growth and development. Others may need further coaching
to assist in embedding this knowledge and skills into their daily work.
Formal training, that addresses specific skills gaps, does not guarantee better managers,
but where it doesn't - you'd have to ask the question - "Is this person suitable for this
management role?
8 days ago • Like
Follow Alan
1
Alan Seymour • This discussion has elicited some very good view points. My belief is
unless one has the emotional fortitude and ability to internalize Management Training and
manifest the same in the real world Management training can go waste. I have met many
an entrepreneur with absolutely no management training that themselves have built
successful business. I have seen them in action and can confidently say they have skill
sets that many professionally trained managers could learn from. I am prone to often
evaluate my children's skills as mangers and my 17 year daughter's perspective on many
a management situation has been better than mine. We need to be able to differentiate
between technical operations and Managing situations and people. Good decisions make
good managers. It has been said... Good managers live to decide and decide to make a
living.
8 days ago • Like • Reply privately • Flag as inappropriate
19/20
Add a comment...
Send me an email for each new comment.
Add Comment
Ads by LinkedIn Mem bers
Help Center
About
Press
LinkedIn Corporation © 2012
One Marketing Dashboard
Cornell Marketing Cert
See One Version Of The Truth In A
Simple Dashboard. You Know You Want
It!
Add an Ivy League Marketing Cert to your
Resume in 12 w eeks. Apply Now !
Blog
Careers
User Agreement
Advertising
Privacy Policy
Talent Solutions
Community Guidelines
Tools
Mobile
Cookie Policy
Developers
Copyright Policy
Publishers
Send Feedback
Language
Upgrade Your Account

Russian Roulette Android

Transcription

Similar documents

Forward Ho - NBiz Magazine

For Pete`s Sake

growing list - Skirting The Rules

WEB/420 - grot.com

- mcseemusicventure.com

A WWII Scrapbook - America in WWII magazine

Untitled - Earth Day and Arbor Day

The ultimate Linkedin cheat sheet PDF

Brian Head Living

management essentials - University of Alberta