The less sure managers are of their opinions, the more vigorously they defend them.
The only managers that have simple problems have simple minds.
Out of this basic language, we build up the other languages of the sciences, beginning with the language of physics, and proceeding to biology, psychology, and the social sciences.
The less important an issue is, the more time managers spend discussing it.
Managers who don't know how to measure what they want settle for wanting what they can measure.
English does not contain a suitable word for 'system of problems.' Therefore, I have had to coin one. I choose to call such a system a mess
Problem solving has traditionally been taken to be an essential function of management. Through systems thinking, however, we have come to doubt the existence of problems and solutions to them.
Data is raw. It simply exists and has no significance beyond its existence (in and of itself). It can exist in any form, usable or not. It does not have meaning of itself. In computer parlance, a spreadsheet generally starts out by holding data.
Unless the information overload to which managers are subjected is reduced, any additional information made available by an MIS cannot be expected to be used effectively.
The measure of information to be developed here will also be related to freedom of choice; that is, it will be a function of the probabilities of choice associated with the alternative courses of action… The measure developed here is a function of m, the number of alternative potential courses of action.
Planning is the design of a desired future and of effective ways of bringing it about. It is an instrument that is used by the wise, but not by the wise alone. When conducted by lesser men it often becomes an irrelevant ritual that produces short-run peace of mind, but not the future that is longed for.
Most managers have some conception of at least some of the types of decisions they must make. Their conceptions, however, are likely to be deficient in a very critical way, a way that follows from an important principle of scientific economy: The less we understand a phenomenon, the more variables we require to explain it.
A good deal of the corporate planning I have observed is like a ritual rain dance; it has no effect on the weather that follows, but those who engage in it think it does. Moreover, it seems to me that much of the advice and instruction related to corporate planning is directed at improving the dancing, not the weather.
Another common deficiency is the failure of some panaceas to take into account a social system's developmental responsibilities to its stakeholders.
Managers cannot learn from doing things right, only from doing them wrong
