Article Review
If one considers that the prime mission of management is to ensurethe continuation and success of the company, then it is very easy to seehow British Admiral Horatio Nelson's once-unique method of getting hiscaptains to wage his kind of battle is applicable to the modern ... Nelson knew that it was the prime responsibility of the commander himself to invent the strategy.... Nelson would not be out of place in the company of the most sophisticated of modern managers. He could probably teach most of them a thing or two about strategic vision, communication and collaboration, trust, delegation and empowerment, all underlying ideas of mission command, all relevant to all organizations (cq), and all part of Nelson's actual management style. [1] Vincent makes the point that this is all essential modern managementtheory, but he is very careful to note the ways in which Nelsonaccomplished the accord that handed him his victories. It was not a 'woowoo' pie-in-the-sky dependence on the convergence of planets or mysticalmeetings of the minds. Nor did he do it by creating a major 'playbook
Neither in Nelson's day nor in modern corporations would that besufficient to win the war or the corporate contest, however. These were likely to have been simple. Becauseof the lack of communication once the battle had been joined, it wasnecessary to also be sure that each captain understood his strengths andknew that, without further consultation or instruction, he was to act onthem. "[3] In sum, Vincent says that the single thing thatenabled the skills of Nelson's armada to succeed was that his captains knewwhat was expected of them and delivered it. In some ways,consensus-building in that sense is no more than Nelson's brand ofcommunicating. Forget the formal Order of Battle, we shall form up as most convenient at the time. Of course there will be failures, just as Nelson occasionally wasdefeated. Nelsonachieved a lot more than that not by expecting perfection, but by arrangingmatters for the best possibility of the best outcome, and then steppingaside, knowing he and his captains had prepared and had their jobs to do. It isnot an endless negotiation, but rather a succinct explanation and anexpectation that the answer will be: I'm with you. [2] Nelson also believed in conveying his message one-on-one or in smallgroups, and he held only a single mission in mind: "to sink, burn anddestroy' the enemy. We shall concentrate our whole force on one or two parts of the enemy, two of our ships to every one of his. We must be prepared with anchors to hold positions and distinguishing lights for night actions. But at the end of that communication-Nelson's or theJapanese-is this: either lead along the lines I expect, or get out. Despite the fact thatmodern corporations have communications gadgets of the most sophisticatedtypes, and Nelson had only binoculars and signal flags once the ships hadembarked on their missions, Nelson was more successful. This is because hetook the time to meet in small groups with every person whose decisionsregarding their own 'departments' would enhance, or scuttle, the mission athand.
Common topics in this essay:
Horatio Nelson's,
Neither Nelson's,
,
lip service,
modern corporations,
modern corporation,
modern managers,
|
Acceptance Essays
