|
A Breakthrough In Management Development
The
breakthrough that is required may be achieved by a new technique that
is called the “accelerated experience method.”
The new method has been designed to assist managers to learn
how to handle all the
significant problems and opportunities they are likely
to face in the specific jobs they are expected to perform. It is called the “accelerated experience method” because
it compresses into days the decision-making experience managers need
years to get on the job. It
teaches managers what experience would teach them but in a fraction of
the time required by ordinary experience.
The
Accelerated experience method achieves its effectiveness by linking
the case method and the computer in a way that radically changes the
teaching and learning process. Then
new method has been used in three programs developed for (1)
publishers of large daily newspapers and (2) publishers of
small daily newspapers and for (3) general managers and managing
directors of multi-national advertising agencies.
As the tow newspaper publishers’ programs illustrate, the
accelerated experience method is job-specific as well as
industry-specific. Two
programs were developed for newspaper publishers because the trustees
of the American Press Institute recognized that the knowledge and
skills required to manage large and small newspapers were so different
that different experiences were needed in order to teach publishers precisely
what they needed to know to be successful in their jobs.
The advertising agency general managers program was designed to
assist experienced general managers and managing directors, as well as
general management candidates, to learn how to improve the profit
growth and competitive strength of the agencies they manage or are
expected to manage.
Advertising
Agency General Management Program:
The way the accelerated experience method works can be
illustrated by the
advertising agency general management program.
It is based on the experience of a successful general manager
during his first three “turnaround” years in managing an actual
but disguised agency. The
program reproduces all the significant human and financial problems
and opportunities he faced in improving the performance of
his agency which had suffered from slow growth, little new
business success, and poor profit performance.
Compressing
Experience: The
general manager dealt with over 150 significant problems and
opportunities during his three “turnaround” years.
Managers who participate in this program analyze from 30 to 40
of these problems and opportunities and make a similar number of
decisions each day. Thus,
the decision-making experience gained by the general manager over a
period of three years is compressed into one week.
Learning
More from Each Decisions: Managers do not necessarily lean more, of course, by making
decisions faster. Increased
learning is achieved in the accelerated experience method by
recreating the entire learning process managers experience on the job.
This process is much too complex to reproduce without the aid
of a computer, however.
The
learning process managers experience on the job consists of the
following five steps:
1.
Identifying and
analyzing a problem or opportunity (or a group of problems or
opportunities)
2.
Deciding on a course
of action
3.
Obtaining information
or “feedback” on the outcome of each decision
4.
“Living” with the
consequences of each decision
5.
Evaluating the impact
of each decision on results.
Anything
less than these five steps is neither a substitute for real experience
nor is it likely to improve on experience as a teacher.
Analyzing
Situations And Making Decisions:
The first step is carried out by the use of brief written cases
similar to serial cases used in the Harvard case method.
After analyzing each problem or opportunity described in these
cases, individual participants commit themselves to a course of action
and then discuss their analyses in groups of four or five.
In
the second step, deciding on a course of action, the members of each
group must reach consensus before entering their decisions in the
computer. Individuals who
disagree with the decisions of the majority of their team may file
“disclaimers” whenever they believe the group consensus is unsound
or unethical. Individual
and group decision-making are used to assure that each member of the
group assumes responsibility for his or her own decisions and actions
yet, at the same time, learns the art of consensus management and team
building, both of which are important in handling cross-functional
coordination and integration problems.
The
teams compete with each other during the program to determine which
team is able to manage the organization (in this case the agency) best
and to achieve its financial and non-financial objectives.
While group decision-making and competition are not used in the
traditional case method of instruction, they are important to the
learning process. Group
decision-making assists participants to develop their interpersonal
and team-building skills, as well as their decision-making skills.
Competition adds interest and excitement and motivates
participants to learn what they need to know to handle their jobs
effectively.
Performance
is judged in an accelerated experience program by the ability of
participants to make
those decisions that would have produced the best results in the
actual situations experienced by the real managers.
If a team makes less effective decisions than its competitors,
the team’s performance suffers.
As a consequence, participants are motivated to analyze the
problems and opportunities carefully and to make sound decisions which
enable their team to win the competition.
Obtaining
“Feedback” On The Outcome Of Each Decision:
When participants in an accelerated experience method program
enter a decision into the computer, it gives them immediate
information or “feedback” on the results or consequences of the
decision. This, of
course, is the third step in the learning process.
It marks the most significant difference between the
accelerated experience method and conventional methods of instruction
which do not go beyond the first two steps in the learning process.
It
should be noted that when the case method was developed, the
technology was not available to give students detailed information on
the outcome or consequences of their decisions.
In one sense, therefore, the accelerated experience method is a
logical extension of the Harvard case method which computer technology
has made possible.
Participants
are not confined to the course of action taken by the manager whose
experience is reproduced. They
are free to follow any alternative course of action the actual manager
considered – or subsequently concluded that he should have
considered. The computer
informs them of the outcome of whatever decision or course of action
they take. This makes the accelerated experience method a dynamic rather
than a static leaning method, because the results participants achieve
depend on the decisions they make – not on the decisions of the
manager whose problems and opportunities they are learning to deal
with.
The
mechanics of this process consist of recording in the computer each of
the alternative courses of action to be considered, together with the
outcome or results that would have been achieved by following each
alternative. The decision
taken by the actual manager and the outcome that resulted from his or
her action is first recorded. What
actually happened thus becomes the baseline for use in determining
results. The outcome that
would have occurred by following each of the other alternatives is
then calculated or inferred from what happened in the actual situation
and entered into the computer. As
participants in an accelerated experience method program decide how
they would handle the problems and opportunities presented to them,
the computer informs them immediately of the outcome of their
decisions.
The
way outcomes are determined
can be illustrated by an opportunity available to the general manager
in the advertising agency program.
The situation required a decision as to whether the agency
should take on a small, but rapidly growing ,client.
The case made it clear that the client was marginally financed,
even though it paid its bills on time and had a good credit rating.
The alternatives are (1) to take on the client or (2) to turn
its business down. Those
who decide to take on the client are subsequently informed by the
computer that the client wants normal credit terms.
Unless normal credit terms are extended, the client can not
carry out the advertising campaign developed by the agency.
In
the actual situation, the agency extended credit to the client and
incurred a very large loss when the client failed.
Expected revenues did not materialize due to aggressive price
cutting and heavy sales promotions by the large competitors in the
industry. Participants,
who make the same decision as the actual agency general manager,
suffer the same consequences. Those
who do not take on the client’s business avoid the loss and are able
to use their resources to pursue other business opportunities.
Those who take on the client’s business but refuse to extend
credit suffer a much smaller loss when the client fails.
Living
With The Consequences:
Participants in accelerated experience programs are required to
“live” with the consequences of their decisions and actions, just
as they must in real life. This
is the fourth step in the leaning process.
If they fail to take appropriate action in dealing with a
difficult problem, they are told by the computer what the consequences
are and are given whatever new problem is created by their action—or
inaction—which usually is even more difficult to handle.
If they fail to take effective action, for instance, in dealing
with an employee who is “sniffing cocaine” or one who demands a
large raise, or one who claims to be discriminated against, they have
to “live” with the consequences which adversely effect results,
require excessive amounts of time, and may become major distractions
for a great many people in the organization.
Participants quickly learn that they cannot escape
responsibility for their decisions and actions which is what their own
experience on the job slowly and painfully teaches them.
Decision
Analysis: The fifth
and final step in the learning process, as it occurs both on the job
and in the accelerated experience method, consists of evaluating the
impact of each decision on results.
This is a reflective step in which managers look back on the
decisions and actions they have taken and the results they have
achieved to determine how they could have improved their performance.
Periodically
during each accelerated experience program, teams take “time out”
from the competition and review together their performance scores in
light of the alternative courses of action they could have taken. This review, which is conducted with the assistance of an
instructor, enables the members of each team to identify their
mistakes and to determine how they
could improve results “ if they were able to do it over
again.” This is a significant step in the learning process which is
designed to assure that managers avoid repeating their mistakes on the
job. Decision analysis is
as important as problem analysis in helping managers improve their
decision-making skills. It
provides a unique learning experience for those who participate in
accelerated experience programs.
Measuring
Performance: In the Advertising Agency General Management Program, the
performance of participants is measured by means of two yardsticks:
(1) financial performance and (2) non-financial performance.
Financial performance is based on revenue and profit growth
over a three-year period. Non-financial
performance is evaluated in terms of five measures of the agency’
competitive strength: (1)
quality of the creative product, (2) relations with clients, (3) new
business development, (4) employee relations, and (5) the agency’s
image in the advertising community.
Performance
is measured quarterly, annually and at the end of the three-year
period. Final results are
not judged until the end of the third year to enable participants to
make short- and long-term profit trade-offs.
It is interesting to note, however, that participants whose
profit performance is the highest during the first year, often end up
with the lowest profits by the third year because they fail to make
the expenditures required to “grow the business.”
Evidence
of Effectiveness: Evidence of the effectiveness of the accelerated experience
method is impressive, even though it may not yet be conclusive.
The evidence is based on the performance “scores” of over
125 managers who have participated in the advertising agency general
management program. These
participants have been both general management candidates and
experienced general managers and managing directors.
The experienced general managers and managing directors have
consistently scored much
higher on their performance than managers who lacked general
management experience. While
this difference in performance is to be expected, it confirms that the
problems and opportunities reproduced in the program are similar to
those general managers learn to handle from their experience on the
job. It also confirms
that the program measures what experience teaches general managers and
managing directors. This
outcome is important because the purpose of the accelerated experience
method is to teach managers what they would learn from experience on
the job.
Equally
important, the scores of managers from the most successful agencies
typically have been higher than those of managers from less successful
agencies. These scores
indicate that the program teaches and measures what the most
successful managers have learned from their experience.
Again, this is significant because managers need a teacher that
will teach them what successful experience can teach them.
|
