The disappointment expressed by environmentalists, wherever they stand politically, at the remit of “their” ministry – which notably “loses” energy and food security – shows the extreme difficulty our country has in coming to terms with “non-hierarchical” management. If the minister does not have these departments under his authority, they fear he will not be able to achieve these objectives…
It is true that the twin Jacobin and Cartesian traditions – centralising and rationalist – that permeate the training of our decision-makers, especially in the public sector, do not easily accommodate the acceptance of counter-powers and alternative points of view. To “count”, to have things “carried out”, it seems imperative to be “the head of…”.
In the private sector, companies and decision-makers increasingly operate in matrix structures, in which one is not always the line manager of one’s “teams”, and in which one has to work with many “stakeholders”. That said, the spread of this type of organisation does not mean that managers are more at ease than their public or political counterparts… Their basic training and “culture” are often the same.
Managers from the Anglo-Saxon tradition seem much more effective at “functional”, “cross-cutting” or “non-hierarchical” management. And it is tempting to link their ease in this area to their philosophical tradition of the balance of powers, whereas our managers from the French tradition grew up with monarchical, imperial and presidential models…
A fundamental change to promote? In any case, skills to develop!
Leave a Reply