Demise of Management

Introduction

This essay will compare and contrast the arguments and themes of the following two articles – “Management: The Work that Dares not Speak its name” by Brocklehurst, Grey, & Sturdy (2010) and "We are all managers now’; ‘We always were’: On the development and Demise of Management” by Grey (1999). In each article the author’s provide a view that indicates significant research into the topic of managers and management.   I intend to discuss two main points, the demise of management and the avoidance of being labelled a manager.

Discussion

Based on the evidence presented, each author has concluded the term manager and management has changed significantly over time and the perception of what a manager is or what management does has also changed during this time. According to Brocklehurst, et al, (2010) they argue that ‘management has become both a ubiquitous and degrading term, and hence to be avoided’ while Grey (1999) explores the ‘erosion of the distinction between managers and managed’ and subsequent demise management.

The way management has been perceived over time has changed significantly. In the early 19th century it was regarded with suspicion’ (Brocklehurst, et al, 2010) and by ‘the mid-20th century it had reached the peak of its prestige’ (Brocklehurst, et al, 2010). However, as we’ve reached the end of the 20th century and now enter the 21st century the status of management is in a period of decline.

This argument is supported by the view of Koch and Godden, 1996, p. 17 which states ‘There is a strong case that management ...could finally die out in the twenty-first century’ (Grey, 1999). This belief indicates that management as it is presently known is evolving to a point of self extinction.

In stark contrast to that line of thought (Drucker, 1955, p.1) suggests that ‘Management will remain a basic institution perhaps as long as Western Civilisation itself survives’ (Brocklehurst, et al,   2010). However the demise of management...