Management (Peter F. Drucker) - 「マネジメント」- 180冊目

ジャンル: 経済・ビジネス
英語難易度: ★★☆
オススメ度: ★★★★☆

ドラッカーの「マネジメント」。経営書のバイブルとして真っ先に上げられる名著。分厚い本ですがこれは外せない。経営はテクニックではなくある意味、哲学的な根幹となる思想が必要だと感じさせられます。それとぼくがドラッカーに惹かれる点がもう一つ。この方、「knowledge worker (知識労働者)」となる重要性について再三再四、説かれています。ドラッカーを読むといつも「学び」の大切さについて思いを深くします。(1974年発刊)

メモ
● ビジネスにおける成功とは常に勝ち続ける事ではない。むしろ打率のようなもんだ。ミスや失敗も当然起こりうるだろうし、それも織り込み済みでなけりゃ。失敗しないということは低い目標に甘んじてチャレンジしてないということ。安パイ狙いだけじゃダメ。

performance does not mean “success every time.” Performance is rather a “batting average.” It will, indeed it must, have room for mistakes and even for failures. What performance has no room for is complacency and low standards.

● 「The Daily Drucker」の感想(148冊目)の時も書きましたが、大事に思うので再掲します。

能力不足、知識不足、不注意、マナーが悪い。これらは何とか後に改善できるかもしれないが、どうにも救いようもない性質がある。それは「不誠実」なことだ。

Finally, in its people decisions, management must demonstrate that it realizes that integrity is one absolute requirement of a manager, the one quality that he has to bring with him and cannot be expected to acquire later on.

(中略)

They may forgive a man a great deal: incompetence, ignorance, insecurity, or bad manners. But they will not forgive his lack of integrity. Nor will they forgive higher management for choosing him. Integrity may be difficult to define, but what constitutes lack of integrity of such seriousness as to disqualify a man for a managerial position is not. A man should never be appointed to a managerial position if his vision focuses on people’s weaknesses rather than on their strengths. The man who always knows exactly what people cannot do, but never sees anything they can do, will undermine the spirit of his organization. Of course, a manager should have a clear grasp of the limitations of his people, but he should see these as limitations on what they can do, and as challenges to them to do better. He should be a realist; and no one is less realistic than the cynic.

● 必要データがシンプルなほど、情報として有用である。量が多ければ良いってもんじゃない。余計なデータが混じるとかえって情報の価値は落ちる。

The fewer data needed, the better the information. And an overload of information, that is, anything much beyond what is truly needed, leads to information blackout. It does not enrich, but impoverishes.

● ちょっと逆説的に聞こえますが… チームにとって、親近感や共感、個人的繋がりなんて必要ない。必要なのはお互いの役割と各自が何に貢献しているかという事の相互理解だ。それでチームはちゃんと回る。

Team members need not know each other well to perform as a team. But they do need to know each other’s function and potential contribution. “Rapport,” “empathy,” “interpersonal relations” are not needed. Mutual understanding of each other’s job and common understanding of the common task are essential.

● 他の人でもできる仕事は経営者の仕事じゃない。経営者になったら、今までやっていた日常業務などしてはいけないのだ。では、経営者がすべきことは何なのか。その疑問について全ページをかけて答えているのが本書です。

1. It is not top-management work if someone else can do it. Of course, most operating work will be eliminated as top-management work by the analysis of key activities; for top management should never be involved in any other activities. But key activities should then be subjected to the question “Could anyone else in the organization do them just as well—or nearly as well? At least, should there be someone capable of doing them?” If the answer is yes, it is not top-management work.
2. People who move into top-management work should, further, give up the functional or operating work they did earlier. That should always be turned over to someone else. Otherwise they are likely to remain functional or operating people.

● 今持っている業界や会社の知識のみに拘泥して、外の世界に新たな接点を見出そうとしない人は確実に劣化の道をたどる。見知った取り巻きとのみ繋がっている経営者は、普通の人がどう考えるかという事が理解できなくなってしまう。そりゃそうなっちゃうでしょう。その方が楽ですからねー。

If they insulate themselves from knowledge other than that peculiar to the industry or to the company, they will soon lose their capacity for technological or social understanding and insight. If they confine their working contacts to people inside the organization, or to people from other businesses who do exactly the same work—as most top-management people are prone to do-they will soon become unable to understand how ordinary human beings behave.

● 本業以外に手を出す多角化は有効なのか？多くの経営者がやらかしてしまいますが、これはビジネス界で長く信じられている迷信で実際にはたいてい失敗しているそうです。
「今の本業が上手くいかないから、よく知らない業態だけど別のビジネスを始めることにするぞ!」なんて… 上手くいく筈もない。心すべきはこの言葉。
「もしこの多角化ビジネスでトラブルが起きた場合、我々はどう対処すべきか分かっているのか？もし答えがNoならば、手を出してはならん」

Yet for a long time the belief has been held widely that the business that “diversifies” into many areas is likely to do better than the business that concentrates on one area. The belief is sheer myth and is contradicted by all evidence.
(中略)
The management that knew how to run it is unlikely to stay. And the management that has bought the company does not understand the business and is unlikely to make the right decisions or to put in the right people. Equally, diversification will fail if its aim is to cure the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of a business by going into other and different businesses. It is obviously unsound to say, “Because we are not competent to manage our own business, we better go into another one of which we know even less.” Yet this is, in effect, what a company says which, in order to cure a weakness of its own, acquires another business which supposedly has the needed strengths.
(中略)
In diversification one has to build on strength. Diversification will be successful only if it promises a greater return on what one can do, and do well. It has to be an extension of one’s proven performance capacity. Whenever management contemplates diversification, whether through grassroots growth or through acquisition, it should ask, “If this new business got into trouble, would we know how to fix it?” If the answer is no, one better stay away.

さて、knowledge Workerとなる事の重要性に関連してオススメの一冊を。 James Young「A Technique for Producing Ideas」(143冊目)の感想にも書きましたが、水野学さんの「センスは知識ではじまる」、これはホントに良い本。ドラッカーの書いている事ともしっくりくるように思います。少しでも多くの本を読みたいとぼくが思う動機の原動力になっています。以下、引用再掲。

「センスとは知識の集積である。これが僕の考えです。センスに自信がない人は、自分が、実はいかに情報を集めていないか、自分が持っている客観情報がいかに少ないかをまずは、意識しましょう。いくら瞬時に物事を最適化できる人がいたとしても、その人のセンスは感覚ではなく、膨大な知識の集積なのです。センスとはつまり、研鑽によって誰にでも手にできる能力と言えます。決して、生まれつきの才能ではないのです。」

そして座右の銘。
「学びて思わざればすなわちくらし、思いて学ばざればすなわちあやうし」