Maybe this is a public sector slanted question more than private, but I've seen instances where this applied there too.
I've worked in a large number of places where the top man seems to create plenty of schemes which may or may not be put to use but do waste a ridiculous amount of time in coordinating them. They then spend huge amounts of time and man-hours to be wasted whilst telling folks of the "big plan", which often gets replaced by another "big plan" a couple of years down the line. They seem to talk in strategies and generalisations (nothing I'm ever guilty of, nosiree bob) without ever understanding the details which will cause them not to work further down the line.
Now not saying that all management is necessarily as flawed as these instances, as some higher-ups do actually take on board the opinions of people that actually do the ground work, but does it not seem like a lot of these heirarchies are not really designed with good results in mind with little autonomy at the lower reaches where standardisation of work is inflicted from above. When absent, a lot of places seem to work far better without them than being hindered by them when they are.
Any thoughts?
I've worked in a large number of places where the top man seems to create plenty of schemes which may or may not be put to use but do waste a ridiculous amount of time in coordinating them. They then spend huge amounts of time and man-hours to be wasted whilst telling folks of the "big plan", which often gets replaced by another "big plan" a couple of years down the line. They seem to talk in strategies and generalisations (nothing I'm ever guilty of, nosiree bob) without ever understanding the details which will cause them not to work further down the line.
Now not saying that all management is necessarily as flawed as these instances, as some higher-ups do actually take on board the opinions of people that actually do the ground work, but does it not seem like a lot of these heirarchies are not really designed with good results in mind with little autonomy at the lower reaches where standardisation of work is inflicted from above. When absent, a lot of places seem to work far better without them than being hindered by them when they are.
Any thoughts?