Dimension #1 – Comparing Management Systems

Key systemic factors in determining management dysfunction

Management Systems are not inherently good or bad; but, they are designed to manage a type of work. When comparing systems, key factors to evaluate include:
Work Domain – differing nature of the work that determines the lane of the system.
Knowledge – how knowledge and practice uniquely varies for each work domain.
Sustainability – what drives the work and keeps it going in a sustainable way. The natural motivation of work, and incentives to help sustain the work in each domain.
Systemic dysfunction and deterioration occurs when a system of management:
Gets outside of its expertise, lane/work domain, and imposes its motivations.
Usurps the functional authority of those having expertise within the domain, corrupting the knowledge of what to do, when to do it, and how best to do it!
Applies the wrong incentives which, if the incentive conflicts with nature of the work, can unwittingly shift the system into systemic degradation of its products and services.
Let’s consider an interesting case study from Martin Fowler, one of the founding fathers of Agile. In this example he compares traditional management to Agile. Dimension #1 – Comparing Management Systems. ©2018 iiSM.ORG, All Rights Reserved.

Click slide to see in context of slide deck

Click to enter the site

Our mission is to strengthen the careers of software leaders by sharing as much software management theory, research and knowledge as humanly possible. We encourage you to join the mission by using our materials for personal growth, sharing among friends, and mentoring within your company; however, commercial training use must be licensed.

Our Funding model is to: provide certification and live training services as desired and requested by our community. We do this so that our staff can buy pop tarts, pay their bills, and produce more career boosting content, research and tools.