Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

New trends in management.

Rate this topic


Dresden
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think we're heading towards more self-management (freelancing, etc.) and self-employment. There are so many new resources available to enable anyone to connect with a market for anything, independently gain necessary skills and avoid wasting resources on unnecessary skills, pay for help by the project or hour rather than by annual salary and conduct business on any scale. It's really exciting, actually. Not sure that's what you were getting at in your question but it's getting easier and easier to find ways to monetize esoteric skills or skill sets that would be too eclectic to put to use in a traditional corporate environment. The internet rocks :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what do you guys and gals think about MBM?

WHAT IS MBM?

"MBM refers to practices used by leaders to continuously discover and apply the beneficial aspects of the market process within an organization (using internal markets to guide transactions between business units, for example, or basing pay on value creation rather than tenure).

MBM is based on economic thinking, sound mental models, and an ability to harness the dispersed knowledge of employees, just as markets harness knowledge in society. To adopt a market-based approach to management is to cultivate and continuously improve those knowledge processes, behaviors, and “rules of the game” within an organization that promote principled entrepreneurship and the creation of superior economic value.

Market Based Management was developed by scholars and businesspeople working in and with Koch Industries, the largest privately-held company in the United States, with assets in oil refining, chemicals, trading, textiles (through its ownership of Invista), and paper products (as a result of its recent acquisition of Georgia-Pacific). Koch Industries Chairman and CEO Charles Koch credits the success of Koch Industries to the application of MBM."

from their website. http://www.mbminstitute.org/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be hard to criticize that. I know I'm not qualified to do that, and I imagine only a handful of people in the world would be. (It amazes me that there are people who claim that CEO's are overpaid.)

I guess time will tell how widespread it can become.

Koch Industries Chairman and CEO Charles Koch credits the success of Koch Industries to the application of MBM.

I would assume it's not possible to test it on a small scale. Do you know if any other companies have tried the same approach, or a similar one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's probably headed in the wrong direction. Independent contractors who work on their own to reach a goal don't need managing per se. For managing bunches of workers, I see too much emphasis on "teams", and a shift away from actually doing productive work towards undertaking various forms of social crap (such as that vomitous concept of "networking" and the emphasis on "community"). Business-external demands for so-called social justice drive this to a large extent, and I just don't see where the counter-forces are. When was the last time you saw a businessman be proud of making a huge profit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I've decided to make a 10 minute presentation MBM. I'm lacking focus though and could use some direction.

Here is the abstract.

Is this creating value? The fundamental underlying question that affects every direction and decision taken in Market Based Management (MBM). Developed by Charles Koch, a prominent Libertarian, he implemented ideas from Ludwig Von Mises and other noted Austrian economists, to develop a strategy of management for the future. And it's paid off. Koch Industries is the largest and most profitable privately held company in the world.

Eliminating pay structures of employees and job titles, his workers are treated as entrepreneurs within the organization. His workers are compensated on value creation they generate for the company, not something like tenure.

"entrepreneurs are rewarded by getting to keep a portion of value they create in society. " Why shouldn't workers be rewarded the same way?

-- here is where I lose focus. I have a bunch of different topics I want to touch on in a limited amount of time (10 mins). Help make this coherent!

MBM has four main assumptions.

todays world is characterized by an unprecedented rate of change- driven by accelerating accumulation of knowledge.

"creative destruction. " Less effective products and methods are constantly being replaced by those that produce greater value.

Second assumption. : prospering in this environment requires a well rounded and internally consistent framework that enables us to interpet and apply new knowledge.

principles that apply to market economies can be applied to an individual company.

Third. Theory and histopry we know that the best frame work for dealing with rapid change is based on economic freedoms.

property rights.

And the fourth is the five key dimensions.

MBM has five key dimensions.

Vision. Determining where and how the organization can create the greatest long term value.

Because Koch Industries is privately held, the company can focus on long term goals, rather than quarterly performance.

Virtue and Talents. Helping ensure that people with the right values, skills and capabilities are hired and retained and developed.

The company looks to develop people from small towns, and farms who work to put themselves ahead in life. They generally recruit talent from state schools.

Decision Rights. Right people in the right roles with the right authority to make decisions and to hold these people accountable.

All employees have a stake in the business, and are held to a profit and loss model. At Koch, it is ok to make a mistake, as long as it is learned from, and not covered up.

Knowledge processes. Creating, Aquiring, Sharing and applying relevant knowledge, measuring and tracking profitability.

Initiative. From rank and file, rather than strick control from the top.

Edited by Dresden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's probably headed in the wrong direction. Independent contractors who work on their own to reach a goal don't need managing per se. For managing bunches of workers, I see too much emphasis on "teams", and a shift away from actually doing productive work towards undertaking various forms of social crap (such as that vomitous concept of "networking" and the emphasis on "community"). Business-external demands for so-called social justice drive this to a large extent, and I just don't see where the counter-forces are. When was the last time you saw a businessman be proud of making a huge profit?

On top of that I've actually heard people say that because of "impression management" we need government intervention in the market place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to come off as sort of trollish but I have a question...Aren't robotics and the internet taking away from jobs? For ex: Many potential employees of car manufacturing companies(potential buyers of the cars) have been replaced by robots. Furthermore, the internet has taken away some potential jobs as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to come off as sort of trollish but I have a question...Aren't robotics and the internet taking away from jobs? For ex: Many potential employees of car manufacturing companies(potential buyers of the cars) have been replaced by robots. Furthermore, the internet has taken away some potential jobs as well.
It is true that advances in business and technology eliminate some jobs, but it is only temporarily, to make way for new jobs that do and make better things. It is obvious that a horse is useless to the average American, yet not so long ago in history it was part of every American's life. Now we drive cars, which are obviously superior, and now there are countless more jobs as a result of that advancement. Nobody would argue that we should go back to using horses, right? That principle applies to all advancement and all goods and services.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to come off as sort of trollish but I have a question...Aren't robotics and the internet taking away from jobs? For ex: Many potential employees of car manufacturing companies(potential buyers of the cars) have been replaced by robots. Furthermore, the internet has taken away some potential jobs as well.

I remember my Micro-Economics teacher telling us that he had heard someone say that "Technical advances don't create jobs, they destroy them." Your concern was voiced a lot during the beginning of the industrial revolution by a lot of people. The reason that these people losing their jobs is a good thing is that they can still seek employment in other areas (unless their skill is made completely obsolete, which I have not heard about) and the process that the advancement is made in becomes more efficient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of those jobs have been replaced by machines though. What kind of jobs can come from this happening?

Jobs come out of need. If you look at your life, and you make a list of the things you need and you assign to each thing a sum of money you are willing to pay for it, you have just made a list of jobs, with their equivalent salaries.

The statement that there aren't enough jobs is synonymous with the statement that human beings have everything they need. Not only is that not true, but if it were, there would be no need for jobs.

Now, if you wish to know why there is unemployment, ask yourself this: who is preventing you from hiring someone unemployed to do what you need done, for whatever sum of money you are willing to pay? That entity is responsible for unemployment.

Many potential employees of car manufacturing companies(potential buyers of the cars) have been replaced by robots. Furthermore, the internet has taken away some potential jobs as well.

Americans who have any ability whatsoever are almost fully employed. And the reason for that "almost" is solely government interference. Without it there would be a huge demand for skilled workers, and immigrants would be begged to come here and help out.

And the idea that UAW workers lost their jobs in Detroit because of the robots is a flat out lie: those jobs were lost to people willing to work for a reasonable salary, in other states, for other companies (Toyota-which btw used robots before the Americans, and yet somehow miraculously managed to create more, new jobs rather than replace the old ones!!), while these three companies have constantly been losing market-share. The government can pump money into them, and keep them afloat forever, but they can't force consumers to buy their crappy products, so when the carparks are full, there's simply no room to put all the cars the government payed for: we are luckily not yet at a point where brand new cars no one wants are thrown away to make room for more subsidized, useless production. (the way milk and grain was thrown away during the Great Depression) So they have to fire people, because there's simply no room for more bad cars.

Here are some of the reasons why there will always be a need for jobs, in this specific industry you mentioned: there are so many things I need in a car, that are possible but simply aren't done, that it's ridiculous. Safety features, fuel economy, better performance. Then there are others who are looking for cars that are fueled by hydrogen-which is more feasible than electric cars, in the long run. And we are all willing to pay for all those things. New technologies need to be invented, new robots, fueling stations etc need to be built and operated, roads need to be improved. Those are all things we urgently need, and we can't get because of the bureaucracy and inefficient management which is plaguing the entire industry. And without the gov. propping them up, that entire establishment in Detroit, with their UAW, moronic car and engine designs (I'm willing to back that up anytime), overpaid and lazy management, politicians on the payroll, would've been swept away a long time ago by Japanese and European manufacturers building new factories in the South.

P.S. Sorry for the off topic. I meant only to give a short answer and move on, but got carried away. I'd have no complaint if someone were to move the entire conversation on car-manufacturers and jobs to an appropriate thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to come off as sort of trollish but I have a question...Aren't robotics and the internet taking away from jobs? For ex: Many potential employees of car manufacturing companies(potential buyers of the cars) have been replaced by robots. Furthermore, the internet has taken away some potential jobs as well.

Where do those robots come from?

They also need to be designed, built, installed, maintained and operated.

If they aren't paying people to do the robot's job, that means they can afford to pay people to do things they couldn't afford before.

BTW, my job of posting information on the internet is paying for my education right now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...