pablo pernot

Temporality of management

When we ask ourselves, as is often the case today, about the managerial posture to have nowadays, about giving meaning and a framework, instead of a command & control management, it is important to understand that the temporality of this management is also changing. I mean by that that a management command & control is a cause and effect management, I ask you that, you do that, good or bad, but the relationship is direct and the time is short, or at least we understand the time it will take. When we set up a framework and give meaning, to make things emerge, or to let teams self-organize, we enter a system, a complex adaptive system. There is no longer really any direct causality. These are two very different temporalities.

When we do modern management, the effort must be constant, and the results will be inconsistent. It’s complicated to live for people used to cause and effect systems, who are used to asking for things and getting them (or not), or for heroes who are used to doing things and getting results (or not).

To make a constant management effort, it is important to know the framework and the meaning (the loop is closed, because the purpose of this management is to convey this framework and meaning).

Making a constant management effort means that the pace is constant. There is no need for “stuffing”. You can have “blows of bourre” on local, temporary actions: end of cycle, events, but you cannot have a blows of bourre on your culture, the image you give to your candidates, the refactoring of your code, etc.

This effort should be regular and continuous.

The effects will often be irregular and often unpredictable (but they will go in the right direction and within the right framework).

All this must be kept in mind.

It is difficult to make constant efforts whose results are inconsistent.

But it is also jubilant to see your efforts pay off at an often unexpected moment.

time stance management system temporality