Running an organisation comprising intelligent people with a ‘Big Boss’ approach isn’t working anymore. That 200-year-old manufacturing-derived model doesn’t hold in the new marketplace. It wastes human potential. It stifles talents. It undermines innovation. It blocks individual fulfilment. Hence, no business striving to be ahead of the competition can afford to be tied down to a system that doesn’t suit modern market realities.
We must note, however, that the command-and-control management system isn’t entirely dead. Its usefulness is still valid in turnaround situations where tight control is required.
Firstly, what is a command and control management system? It is a traditional, top-down management style where top leaders make all decisions and dictate tasks, leaving employees with little autonomy. In this system, authority is centralised; Decision-making power is concentrated in the hands of a few leaders, leaving the teams closest to customers less empowered to respond to challenges promptly.
Anyone who has been to consumer-facing floors would understand the danger of concentrating authority in the hands of leaders who hardly have a whiff of what is happening down the operating chain. In a fast-changing operating environment, a lot can go wrong quickly in the market before top management is ever aware. The less empowered employees would sense the change since they are closer to the consumers. Meanwhile, it could take some time before the critical change information is funneled upward and management response channeled back downward.
This accounts for why many big businesses fail to spot and respond to changes taking place in the market swiftly: Most often, the leaders who wield overall decision-making power are disconnected from market reality. Before reality pinches them, nimble competition has swept their organisation aside.
Here is the point. Command and control management systems fail to provide employees with the freedom to engage in meaningful work or innovation.
Moreso, one of the greatest disadvantages of that old style is that it is out of tune with the new generation workforce. Generation Y, Z and alpha possess unique parameters for workplace fulfilment. Among others, they seek significance. According to Tony Robbins, they are unwilling to be micromanaged. They want to make significant contributions to the company they work for.
Managing the workforce with a ‘big boss’ mentality isn’t going to sit well. Steve Tappin and Andrew Cage, in their book ‘The New Secrets of CEO’, explained, “Command and control is not only too slow and cumbersome for the next decade but is also likely to be rejected by the younger generations.”
Deloitte Insights captures the growing dissatisfaction with the old system and how those affected seek to reshape it: “They’re looking to reshape what work is at its core. From seeking out more flexibility to prioritising mental health and meaningful impact, they’re rejecting traditional notions and structures of work in pursuit of their own definitions of career satisfaction and growth.”
A recent Forbes survey indicated that around 25% of Gen Z workers report being satisfied with their workplace. Apparently, if you have a good number of young people in your company and are still adopting the fading management system, your company’s workforce engagement score could be low. Turnover is also likely to be high.
What is the proposed way out?
- Change the role of the CEO – Considering the speed of market change, CEOs can no longer be the general controller of every action of their staff members. The best position for the CEOs is facilitator. This approach would position them to facilitate the talent and energy of the team and remove roadblocks that impede brilliant execution at crucial touchpoints, freeing talent to respond to challenges where they appear more quickly.
- Soften your corporate boundaries – It is also important to pivot to partnership collaboration with external parties for faster technical and commercial response to market changes. Working with government and experts to milk opportunities is key as the world grapples with fast-paced innovation. Businesses would have to leverage each other’s expertise to provide an effective, fast response.
- Give top leaders a different role – Top management would have to become orchestrators rather than controllers. The agenda would be to provide soft leadership that guides and releases energy down the operation chain.
