avoid causing trouble with a change in behavior, turned a perfectly good relation-
ship into a nightmare of embarrassment and misunderstanding” (Drucker 2004,
p. 143). By striving desperately to always behave properly the manager is ultimately
discredited; “natural” and “casual” employee relations become impossible. In my
view, however, this does not represent a contradiction to the need to also conduct
behavior-related training. This training must not consist of schematic recipes, but
should help managers to develop their own leadership styles and to trust themselves
and their employees. In Chap. 3 we will see how this can be implemented with the
systemic approach.
As a “teacher for companies,” Drucker felt that charity organizations in the U.S.,
such as the Boy Scouts, the Red Cross and major churches, take a leading position
in the application of modern management practices, especially when it comes to the
issues of strategy, leading teams effectively, and the motivation and productivity of
knowledge workers.
For example, let’s examine the issue of motivation: because the volunteers are
not paid, they have to derive the satisfaction from their work, and this reward must
be great enough to compensate for the lack of payment. What do employees
require? A clear mission and comprehensive training. And they want recognition,
responsibility, prospects and accountability. In other words: they need their perfor-
mance to be measured against clearly defined and meaningful targets. Drucker
believed that such voluntary organizations can provide valuable insights into how
to utilize and motivate knowledge workers (Drucker 2004, p. 51).
Drucker came to the following conclusion: employees should not be “managed”;
instead, the task must be to lead them. And the goal here is to use the specific
strengths and skills of each employee productively. But this is only possible if the
leader begins with himself or herself.
2.1.1.5 Leading Yourself
Drucker emphasized the “art” of “managing yourself”: in today’s knowledge
economy it is all about whether someone knows his or her specific strengths, values
and preferred ways of working (see Drucker 1999a, pp. 9–19). Here he approaches my
specific concern, the first-person perspective of the manager (Drucker 2004, p. 257)
and also deals with the management of our own strengths. A note on understanding:
when he talks about “management” Drucker usually means what I call “leadership.”
Drucker supported the thesis that a growing number of employees will have to
manage themselves in the future. He initially views this issue more structurally and
economically, in the sense that the knowledge workers need to be entrepreneurs and
marketers of their own achievements. At this point however, Drucker’s perspective
falls short. Self-management is not just a question of self-promotion, but also of
self-knowledge. Also, what I particularly feel to be missing here is the involvement
of the manager, who is also a knowledge worker who needs to lead himself or
herself. Their leadership quality and style depends on their own strengths and
weaknesses.
24 2 Occupation or Calling: What Makes for Good Leadership?