Particularly in the UK, there are two opposite and equally misleading theories about how to learn management. One is that all you need is common sense and experience (“amateurism”). The other is that you need the credentials (“credentialism”) to do your job effectively.Neither theory works well, however.
Firms that don’t believe in management training are often poorly managed, don’t have people management systems and are prone to the idiosyncrasies of individual managers who believe their own methods are best.
A credentialist company, on the other hand, is training-obsessed. It may produce catalogues of approved in-house courses or specialist external courses on everything from negotiation skills to letter writing. The assumption is that no aspect of management, however mundane or trivial, can be acquired through observation or self-learning.
But neither the amateur nor the credentialist is a professional. The hallmark of professionalism is, really, conscientious workmanship. It means that people conform to the technical and ethical standard of a vocation. The army offers a good model of professional management training. Officers go through a series of courses and exercises to learn simple but important skills. There are clear systems developed to encourage good management — including appraisal systems, skills and practices. Because systems are followed, there is consistency in people management over time and across different branches. The army is also less prone to following the wild mood swings of gurus as they find new magic bullets in old ideas dressed up for the modern zeitgeist.
People have not fundamentally changed much over the past 500 years, and if a management style and socialization process has been found that is efficient, there seems little reason to change it.
Indeed, the way in which people join professions through a lengthy and fairly arduous apprenticeship is a good model for how to acquire management skills. An apprentice studies with, observes and learns from a master. This rather old-fashioned approach to learning seems to have been revived of late, with the very popular “master-class concept”, whereby people literally sit at the feet of a master and learn from him or her. It suggests a great hunger for a forgotten educational method.
One goes to professionals because they are well trained to deliver exacting standards. But neither amateurs nor credentialists can deliver exacting management standards. Too much or too little of a good thing leads to equally unhappy consequences.