It has been a long time since Peter Drucker formulated the background to "Management by Objectives"; shortly afterwards George Odiorne also contributed very significantly to its popularization, and since then many other experts have delved very accurately into the subject. In this period of time, the DpO has generated hundreds of books, more than a million seminars, and of course some income for the consulting firms; however, this doctrine continues to give much to talk about. It was applied first to senior managers and salespeople, then to middle managers, and later on to titled personnel and other ordinary workers. It can be said - some readers will remember it - that the DpO arrived in Spain in the 80s, especially from the hand of multinationals, not without generating both skepticism and expectation.
It is possible that at first the system was applied with only discreet rigor, probably due to inexperience and haste. Perhaps it was decided to get going, so that the organization learned on the fly to work for objectives, and that could cloud the internal marketing of the DpO, which still raises some reservations or cautions today. Also, the scope of application was probably forced, wanting to get to the bottom line. From the outset, a more strategic, holistic, systemic and solidary perspective may have been lacking - and perhaps still lacking, in some cases - when formulating objectives. In fact, the goals of each individual seem less and less individual and more collective. And on the other hand, especially in the beginning, such objectives often seemed rather simple functions or tasks,drawn from job descriptions. All this has been improving with experience, adding what was lacking (perspective) and eliminating what was left over (individualism, for example).
But before proceeding with this small semblance of the system, it must be remembered that, like so many other things, the DpO seems to have a kind of Janic face: one face ("A") observes the cultural change in boss-collaborator relationships, and other side ("B") attends to the efficiency of the organization, in achieving its desired future. Although we accept that of the two faces (we could even speak of some more), there is no doubt that it is a single brain: the doctrine - and the consequent liturgy - of the DpO seeks the activation and alignment of individual efforts, after the desired goals. As Jack Welch seems to have argued, and all of us would hold equally, "it is the people, not the goals, that lead us to the goal."
Boss-collaborator relationships
With regard to face "A" - vertical relationships - the cultural change that the DpO intends to introduce in organizations is logically diluted or neutralized, when its implementation is distorted or adulterated. In order for the virtues of this management system to be seen, empowerment must be produced in the fair measure and with authenticity, jointly delegating authority and responsibility, to the greatest degree possible, to those who are prepared to assume them. Middle managers and managers must be willing to give up power, and workers to assume it responsibly in a climate of mutual trust, which is satisfactory for them and allows them to assume the roles that the new times demand, and exercise their dose of leadership. It can already be seen that the DpO is much more than a form to fill out at the beginning of the year:it has a lot to do with a warm, participatory and professional style of leadership.
Drucker himself warns that different people should not be managed the same, nor should the same people be managed the same at different times. So the leadership must be well aware of what can be required of each person and the help they will need. But we can also stop at the horizontal coordinate: one cannot feel completely satisfied with the achievement of his own objectives, if his colleagues do not achieve theirs, for the benefit of the overall results. This gets us into the "B" side.
The definition of objectives
We called the "B" side of the DpO's face that looks after business results. We have to be sure that the majority of individuals achieving their objectives will mean an unequivocal approach to the organization's objectives. In other words, our efforts must be fully aligned with the strategy formulated for the short and long term.
Unfortunately, experience shows that this attunement or alignment does not always occur, which, however, is so blatantly inexcusable. Some researchers on the subject -for example, Norton and Kaplan in their Balanced Scorecard- propose very useful techniques, in the intention of transferring the strategy formulated by the company, to daily management. The point is that the formulation of the objectives must be fully correct, avoiding ambiguities, activating the emotional energy of individuals, and ensuring the contribution to the whole.
It must be emphasized that the vision and strategy of the company must encourage the commitment of the entire organization. The mere observance of them - vision, strategy, tactics, policies, etc. - would be more related to the work by tasks or functions; But work for objectives implies a different dimension of commitment: it implies a personal commitment, not so much with the boss as with the company as a whole. This is located, not on one or the other face of the DpO, but in its own brain: in its essence: in the genesis of Management by Objectives.
Shared vision and strategy
Peter Senge was speaking precisely of the shared vision as one of the disciplines of intelligent organizations. It does not matter - Senge came to tell us - that the vision initially arises from the leader or from other levels of the organization, but it must be realistic, attractive, stimulating and shared; mostly shared. Senior Management must be explained very didactically, until reaching the energization -synergization- of all, after the short and long term objectives. We cannot be surprised at the overlap between different management postulates, and we would also say that DpO combines well with everything.
Many other experts agree that strategy does not necessarily have to be something personal to the leader; But if this were the case, there must be room for feedback, and therefore consider the corresponding approaches alive: that is, willing to renew themselves when necessary. The rapid changes brought about by the information society force senior managers to constantly rethink their strategies, and listen to other levels of the organization, so that a communion of interests and expectations takes place.
conclusion
The individual who is driven by objectives - knowing what to achieve and how to do it - feels motivated and committed to the future drawn for his company; feels that his own objectives clearly contribute to the achievement of those of the community; He feels equally aligned with the culture (values, styles of action, etc.) of the organization; has progress information (feedback); he knows himself to be a participant in the decisions of his environment; sees in the DpO a means for their realization and their professional and personal development. If not, there would be a liturgy but there would be no Direction by Objectives doctrine. All these postulates seem to have quite a future, despite the past fifty years.
