管理学原著阅读报告第二章.docx

The reading report of unit two2011330300403 12会计（4）班 王婷慧1. The theory of the businessNot in a very long time, many companies are faced with problems, that is, yesterday they were superstars but today they find themselves stagnating and frustrated, in trouble and, often, in a seemly unmanageable crisis. The root cause of nearly every one of these crises is the assumptions on which the organization has been built and being run no longer fit reality. In this background, Drucker puts forward the theory of the business, which are assumptions about shaping any organizations behavior, dictating its decisions about what to do and what not to do, defining what the organization considers meaningful results, identifying customers and competitors, technology and dynamics, a company strengths and weakness.Every organization, whether a business or not, has a theory of the business. Indeed, a valid theory that is clear, consistent, and focused is extraordinarily powerful. The University of Berlin is an example. Similarly, the theory of the business explains both the success of companies like General Motors and IBM. In fact, what underlines the current malaise of so many large and successful organizations worldwide is that their theory of the business no longer works.What can explain the fact that at both IBM and GM the policies, practices, and behaviors that worked for decades-and in the case of GM are still working well when applied to something new and different-no longer work for the organization in which and for which they were developed? The realities that each organization actually faces have changed quite dramatically from those that each still assumes it lives with. Put another way, reality has changed, but the theory of the business has not changed with it.A theory of the business has three parts. First, there are assumptions about the environment of the organization: society and its structure, the market, the customer, and technology. Second, there are assumptions about the specific mission of the organization. Third, there are assumptions about the core competencies needed to accomplish the organizations mission. The valid theory of the business has four specifications. Firstly, the assumptions about environment, mission, and core competencies must fit reality. Secondly, the assumptions in all three areas have to fit one another. Thirdly, the theory of the business must be known and understood throughout the organization. Fourthly, the theory of the business has to be tested constantly. Some theories of the business are so powerful that they last for a long time. But eventually everyone becomes obsolete. There is a need for preventive care-that is, for building into the organization systematic monitoring and testing of its theory of the business. There is a need for early diagnosis. There is a need to rethink a theory that is stagnating and to take effective action in order to change policies and practices, bringing the organizations behavior in line with the new realities of its environment, with a new definition of its mission, and with new core competencies to be developed and acquired.2. Managing OneselfManaging oneself is important. Most of us, even those of us with modest endowments, will have to learn to manage ourselves. The paper is divided into seven parts. The first part is about discovering one strengths by means of feedback analysis. Several implications for action follow from feedback analysis. First and foremost, concentrate on your strengths. Put yourself where your strengths can produce results. Second, work on improving your strengths. Third, discover where your intellectual arrogance is causing disabling ignorance and overcome it. It is equally essential to remedy your bad habits. One should waste as little effort as possible on improving areas of low competence. It takes far more energy and work to improve from incompetence to mediocrity than it takes to improve from first-rate performance to excellence.The second part is about how do I perform? Like ones strengths, how one performs is unique. It is a matter of personality. Whether personality be a matter of nature or nurture, it surely is formed long before a person goes to work. And how a person performs is a given, just as what a person is good at or not good at is a given. A persons way of performing can be slightly modified, but it is unlikely to be completely changed-and certainly not easily. Just as people achieve results by doing what they are good at, they also achieve results by working in ways that they best perform. A few common personality traits usually determine how a person performs. There are two examples about Dwight Eisenhower and Winston Churchill concerning the question “am I a reader or a listener?” To manage yourself effectively, you also have to ask Do I work well with people or am I a loner? And if you do work well with people, you then must ask. In what relationship? Do not try to change yourself-you are unlikely to succeed. But work hard to improve the way you perform. And try not to take on work you cannot perform or will only perform poorly.The third part is about “What Are My Values?”. This is not a question of ethics. With respect to ethics, the rules are the same for everybody, and the test is a simple one called “mirror test”. In the morning, use the mirror to see what kind of person you want to be. But ethics is only part of a value system - especially of an organizations value system. To be effective in an organization, a persons values must be compatible with the organizations values even though there is sometimes a conflict between a persons values and his or her strengths. Despite the continuing Depression, values, in other words, are and should be the ultimate test.The fourth part is about “Where Do I Belong?”. People should be able to decide where they belong and where they do not belong. Knowing where one belongs can transform an ordinary person-hardworking and competent but otherwise mediocre-into an outstanding performer.The fifth part is about “What Should I Contribute?”. It is rarely possible -or even particularly fruitful - to look too far ahead. A plan can usually cover no more than 18 months and still be reasonably clear and specific. Where and how can I achieve results that will make a difference within the next year and a half? First, the results should be hard to achieve-they should require stretching, to use the current buzzword. Second, the results should be meaningful. Finally, results should be visible and, if at all possible, measurable.The sixth part is about “Responsibility for Relationships”. Managing yourself requires taking responsibility for relationships. This has two parts. The first is to accept the fact that other people are as much individuals as you yourself are. They perversely insist on behaving like human beings. The second part of relationship responsibility is taking responsibility for communication.The final part is about “The Second Half of Your Life”. There are three ways to develop a second career. The first is actually to start one. Often this takes nothing more than moving from one kind of organization to another: the divisional controller in a large corporation, for instance, becomes the controller of a medium-sized hospital. The second way to prepare for the second half of your life is to develop a parallel career. Finally, there are the social entrepreneurs.3. Marketing Is ManagementPeter F. Drucker is widely regarded as one of the last centurys most influential management thinkers. He saw himself as a management, and he saw marketing as a core responsibility of management, not as a separate business function. His focus was always on management in general, not marketing per se, with an understanding of customers ever-changing needs, wants, and preferences as the driving force for business success. The author thinks marketing might be a stronger field today if we had been paying more attention to what he was telling us for more than half a century and following his advice.Marketing is essential to management. By stressing the importance of customer orientation, Drucker established the raison detre for marketing as the most vital part of management, as a fundamental value for the organization, but not, it must be noted, as a distinct business function.Customer orientation is considered as organizational culture by McKitterick. But unlike Drucker, he saw it as a distinct function within the organization hierarchy providing direction and leadership to the other functions.Drucker warned early on about the possibility that the analytical techniques of management science, while holding great promise, could undermine management focus on strategy and customer needs because of its emphasis on techniques that might become merely “a management gadget bag.” Today, there is no doubt that much published research in marketing has been more data-driven than theory-driven, focused more on improving analytical techniques with sophistication, rather than on understanding of marketing problems and management practice.In recent years, marketing scholars have been trying to rethink the dimensions of the discipline with a central focus on the importance of market targeting and positioning based on the intersection of the firms distinctive competence with the customers definition of value. Marketing needs a large group of scholars working at the interface with other management functions, with the goal of re-integrating marketing with management.The survival of marketing as an intellectual discipline may depend ultimately on its re-acceptance as a distinct, core management competence. To achieve that goal, it will be necessary to specify clearly what is meant by marketing competence that can be taught and learned, studied and related to measurable outcomes.Fifty years after the articulation of the marketing concept, we have the benefit not of hindsight but of experience. There are innumerable examples of the decline of business firms due to failure to keep up with changing consumer wants, needs, and tastes, changing technology, and changing competition. That decline is, by definition, a failure of the two basic functions of any business enterprise, as identified by Peter Drucker, the entrepreneurial functions of marketing and innovation. As marketing in its heydays of the 1960s and 1970s became a separate business function rather than the central guiding management discipline of the firm, focused on the customers changing definition of value, it gradually declined in importance and usefulness and was increasingly unable to compete for the managerial and financial resources necessary to maintain and build its capabilities. In the academic world, the marketing discipline continues to struggle hopefully with the problem of defining its intellectual domain. Old paradigms such as the marketing mix and the “Four Ps” are now viewed critically but no clear winner in the search for a new paradigm has emerged. The tension among behavioral, economic, managerial, and quantitative approaches can be more stimulating of intellectual debate than productive of increased marketing effectiveness and efficiency. The value of an integrated view of marketing as a management discipline, necessary for its vitality and survival, is often obscured by the turf battles of academic specialties. A careful re-consideration of the principles and values espoused by Peter F. Drucker can suggest a more optimistic future for marketing.4. 管理是门艺术日本人认为，对日本战后经济复苏和崛起起到至关重要作用是三位美国人提出的管理模式。一个是Edwards Deming的质量管理，一个是Joseph MJuran的组织生产、如何训练管理工人，还有一个就是我（Drucker）的管理和市场营销方法。对于日本人这种成功，我给出了两个主要的原因，第一个原因是，日本的经理人员并非以某一所要达到的利润为出发点，而是以市场目标为出发点。第二个原因是，日本企业已经接受了我的观点，即企业的最终目的不是赚钱，而是创造顾客，满足顾客的需要。管理，作为一门学科，作为一种实践，涉及人与社会的价值观。诚然，组织不是为存在而存在，它的最终目的应超越自我。管理既要眼睛向外，关心它的使命及组织成果，又要眼睛朝内，注视那些能使个人取得成就的结构，价值观及人际关系。管理必须是一门学科一种系统化的知识体，能为人所学，甚至能予以传授。实际上，管理是一门人文艺术。My thinking about “managing oneself”Historys great achievers - a Napoleon, a da Vinci, a Mozart - have always managed themselves. That, in large measure, is what makes them great achievers. It is obvious that managing oneself is very important if you want to be successful. Knowing that is not a difficult thing, but how to do is a question. When I first see the article written by Drucker I find managing oneself is not new. As far as I am concerned, managing oneself means making one plan and try one best to overcome weakness to realize the exact goal. Absolutely, my understanding is simple and not the same as Drucker. Now I will follow Drucker theory about managing oneself strictly to rethink my own management.What Are My Strengths?Drucker has introduced a method called feedback analysis to discover one strengths which needs to pay attention to three points. First and foremost, concentrate on your strengths. Put yourself where your strengths can produce results. Second, work on improving your strengths. Third, discover where your intellectual arrogance is causing disabling ignorance and overcome it. Based on myself, I think my strength lies on carefulness and responsibility, and in contrast to some interesting things I tend to do tasks in an orderly way. In other word, I have good patience and tolerance which help me to adjust to boring working environment. I should make full use of my strengths and put myself in an appropriate place. Correct direction leads us walk a long way.How Do I Perform?Most of us do not even know that different people work and perform differently. Like ones strengths, how one performs is unique. It is a matter of personality. After reading some famous persons experiences, I confirm that I am a reader. In general, I am used to making preparation for everything I decide to do. I am lack of flexibility and cant react well if some emergencies take place. Obviously, I should recognize that I am a reader, not a listener. By knowing that, I can perform better.What Are My Values?As is referred to one values, we usually think over ethics. But the author has come up with values that is not a question of ethics. The mirror test is a useful way to test your value by asking yourself “What kind of person do I want to see in the mirror in the morning?” “What is ethical behaviour in one kind of organization or situation is ethical behaviour in another”. What to do seems less important than what kind of person you want to be. It is concerned with one values. I think evaluating ones success can not only use the standard of how much money he or she makes or what kind of power he or she owns. I mean a person success comes from the contribution he makes. I agree