аЯрЁБс>ўџ FHўџџџEџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС!` №Пx8bjbj\­\­ .F>Ч>Чx0џџџџџџЄђђђђђђђ    $. 7 ьFFFFFFFFЖ И И И И И И $# h‹м ђ– FF– – м ђђFFё ъ ъ ъ – тђFђFЖ ъ – Ж ъ ъ ђђъ F: PKЬaЂCЧ x ^ъ Ж  07 ъ ›ж ›ъ ›ђъ ЬF’иhъ @T”FFFм м р FFF7 – – – –   ђђђђђђџџџџ Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-based Management, Pfeffer, J. & Sutton, R.I. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, 2006: ISBN 1-59139-862-2, $US 27.50 I’m confident, no doubt along with the publishers, that ‘Hard Facts’ will be a book that many academics and practitioners will cite as an exemplar of evidence-based management, at least by those who subscribe to the rationally-based management agenda for which Pfeffer is one of the best known advocates. Arising from earlier work by these authors on the ‘Knowing-doing Gap’, Pfeffer and Sutton have tackled the problem, at least as they see it, of ‘why smart people do dumb things’ - why practitioners, supported by many guru/best-practice manuals, ‘do things that were at odds with the best evidence of what works’ (Preface). In doing so, they have attempted a de-bunking exercise of many of the widely-held shibboleths of current management practice, assigning them to the bins of ‘total nonsense’ or ‘dangerous half-truths’. In their place they seek to construct a way of doing management based on ‘hard facts’, otherwise known as evidence-based management. This project reflects similar calls for science-based practice in professions such as medicine, nursing and teaching. Alongside the best selling economics paperback ‘Freakonomics’ by Levitt and Dubner, this book is often (but not always) composed of potent stuff that should provide strategists, leaders, talented stars with some uncomfortable reading and ‘mere’ managers with some support. Following an introductory chapter on why companies need to base practice on evidence - rather than on typical strategies involving casual benchmarking, doing what seemed to have worked in the past or following deeply held but unexamined ideologies - they set out in Chapter 2 a framework for what evidence-based management might look like. Their analogue is modern medicine, which has attempted to privilege science over clinical experience with varying degrees of success, though the idea and, indeed, evidence that physicians don’t seem to rely on science-based practice is a rather worrying one. Thus they promote, through a mixture of research and always interesting illustrations, the notion of substituting ‘hard facts’ for commonsense and wisdom at the expense of novelty and big ideas. Evidence-based management is defined in the following terms: treating old ideas as old ideas; being suspicious of breakthroughs (since they almost never happen); celebrating communities of smart practitioners and collective brilliance (not lone geniuses); emphasizing the strengths and weaknesses of your ideas; using success and failure stories to illustrate rather than demonstrate good or bad practice; and taking a cool, dispassionate approach to ideologies and theories. In line with some of the best advice on management from scholars such as Weick, they promote an attitude of wisdom as a pervasive standard in applying management knowledge. Chapter three tackles the first of five dangerous half-truths or forms of total nonsense: work is fundamentally different from the rest of social life and should be treated as such. As they claim, such a belief leads managers to introduce often oppressive rules on how people should behave, think and feel when they are at work that are fundamentally at odds with their non-work lives (sometimes described as checking in your emotions and brains at the factory gates). Though they acknowledge some benefits in support of such views, they cite contrary evidence that presents the benefits of integrating work with the rest of life, including treating people as whole persons with family problems, responsibilities and other warts, recruiting family and friends and letting people be themselves, that can lead to a big pay-off. Chapter four is more controversial and topical since it deals with the widely held belief, especially among advocates of talent management, that the best organizations have the best people and that individual performance leads to organizational performance. Though much of this material is well-known to academics working in the field who are familiar with the ‘fundamental attributional error’, they set out the assumptions of the talent management agenda and systematically undermine them with sound evidence and argument. These assumptions are: the best people in organizations are much better than the rest and add proportionately more value (consequently they should be paid so much more and treated very differently); organizations’ recruitment and selection processes are good enough to allow them to spot the best people in advance; and recruiting stars will attract even more stars. While there is a case for all three, Pfeffer and Sutton marshal the evidence they have produced elsewhere to show how the obsession with individual talent or human capital at the expense of groups or social capital can be bad for organizations because, as they demonstrate: talent isn’t so easy to identify; individual performance only explains a small part of organizational performance, individuals vary over time in performance; talented people recruit in their own image, thus restricting the notion of what counts as talent; talent isn’t fixed over time and talented people have to work very hard to remain talented; and that great systems are often more important than great people, so repair the system not the person. Again, for these writers, the recurrent theme is the importance of fostering wisdom and experience, which is the most crucial talent of all. Their rail against the focus on individuals at the expense of groups informs the subject matter of Chapter five on the damaging role of financial incentives in organizations. Given the received wisdom of paying people huge bonuses to perform – as I write there is a story on BBC news about the record bonuses being paid to workers in the City of London’s financial companies, justified by economists’ arguments on how we would all be worse off if they weren’t so ‘incentivized’ – this is both topical and controversial. Treading some well-worn, but no less important, ground that sets out the motivational theory underpinning the role of financial incentives, they show how hard evidence has proven individual financial incentives to have been positively damaging to organizations. This arises for at least four reasons. First, we attribute financial motivation to others even though we deny being so motivated ourselves, thus neglecting what really counts at work. Second, incentives may signal what is important to people but these signals may be very blunt and can lead to totally inappropriate behaviour – the ‘what gets measured gets rewarded even though what is measurable may not be important’ argument. Three, financial incentives attract the wrong kind of talent and create greedy people. Fourth, and counter-intuitively, variable pay, which results in greater pay dispersion between top, middle and average performers, equals lower rather than higher overall organizational performance (one definitely worth examining for compensation specialists). Chapter six deals with strategy as destiny, focusing on the widely held views on strategy and strategic planning as a top management prerogative and as the single most important cause of a firm’s success. Such assumptions underpin the rationale for paying people enormous sums of money for exercising strategic leadership and underpin the design of most MBA programmes, nearly all of which have capstone courses in strategic management and subsidiary courses in topics like strategic HRM, strategic marketing and the like. Pfeffer and Sutton examine some of the evidence for these assumptions, including the competitive positioning model, and find them wanting in terms of logic and evidence. Their criticisms aren’t new; they draw on a combination of the resource-based view of strategy, the change management literature that emphasises the role of execution rather than design, and the incremental-learning perspective. However, they do provide new illustrations and,in combination, their arguments help re-balance the see-saw in favour of alternative approaches to the classical, design school of strategy. Chapter seven takes on the change or die school of thought, which dominates much of the new economy literature and best selling books on organizational transformation. As they point out, the cure - change and innovation – can be worse than the supposed illness, precisely because they lose the benefits of sticking with what they know while overestimating the advantages of new technologies, business models, products and processes. New product and service failure rates are very high, mergers and acquisitions are fraught with problems, as are the attempted implementations of processes such as BPR, ERP, outsourcing and now e-HR. Though this chapter is a little weak on hard evidence and a little thin, its message and what to do about it are well worth reading for those managers looking to advance their own careers through innovation. Understanding the need for receptive contexts for change, being wise by exercising self-doubt rather than over-confidence, and being able to ‘embrace the mess’ (paradoxes and ambiguity) are useful guidelines for change managers. Chapter eight is the latest in a recent history of swipes at the leadership ‘industry’ and is one of the most interesting parts of the book. The belief that leaders make a big difference pervade nearly all current business and management thinking, spawning nearly 15,000 references peer-reviewed articles since 1974 and 110,000 listings of the term in Amazon’s search engine, not to mention a rash of leadership courses, leadership institutions and leadership competence frameworks. Pfeffer and Sutton take on the notions that great leaders are in control of their companies and that they make a significant difference to overall organizational performance, adducing some hard facts which go back to Pfeffer’s original research in the 1970s. They also make a case for why the myths of leadership persist despite the evidence that they are rarely in control and don’t make other than a modest impact on organizational performance. Again, we return to the problem of the fundamental attributional error caused by the needs of people and, increasingly, the financial and business press to blame or praise individuals and create celebrity rather than attribute cause to more abstract ideas such as contexts, groups and institutions. They conclude the chapter with some interesting and novel messages regarding what good leaders should do, which are an antidote to the school of strong leadership that emphasises leading from the front; these messages are likely to resonate even more so with the experience of many leaders, especially in complex stakeholder environments like the public sector, who understand only too well that they are not in control and can never be in control (but are expected to be). This book concludes with some lessons on profiting from evidence-based management, which follow neatly from their storyline, and from their hard facts and dangerous half-truths. For practitioners, this book is an essential corrective to the airport books and consulting advice they often diet on. And although, many academics will be familiar with the evidence and the general thrust of the argument, especially those of a critical management hue, the book deserves a wide audience in the academy not only for its content but also for its presentation. I had the pleasure of listening to Jeff Pfeffer present an extended lecture on this material in Glasgow during 2005, during which he gave full credit to his co-author, Bob Sutton, and his researcher for their contributions. He also revealed how important it was to him that he wrote well, in a manner that would make practitioners want to read on. Pfeffer regularly submits his work for stringent criticism to practitioner reviewers in a business magazine column, especially asking for feedback on writing style. There is an important lesson here for scholars who seek to engage wider audiences for the work of business school academics, unless of course, the objective of academic writing is to obscure, unnecessarily complexify and disengage with management practice. ^ЦЧШењ- L f ‚ …    В ї   % l v … † @ C  # 2 > V k  Ѕ І 7 < = D Y _ d  ‹ ‘ б № %:nq}€ -.>rВЛРгѓїѓяѓычыуыупычычыпылулулзлузгзпзчпзуЯуЫзпуЧуЧУчЧыПуЛПЗПЛГЛЗЛЏЛуЛуЛуЛуЛhQ6џhФRЫhв^іhL hйo$h€:бhrhП3щhwnCh§@БhБhy#сh=MhЭbнhyl+ht•hC–hћh?hћh?hћh?5E`aЧШСТфх$$`(a(’,“,B3C3D3v8w8x8§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§x8§„…ЃШЩдтхы№ё DE\t}”Тф*BRtАC‡Њмтъўu†‡ˆ–œCDE\eh•–вуьѕz|Œœмночџ ;PQŒnssZ^quŒЙќјє№јєьјшфшфшфјрјрјрмрмрмрмршфшфєфє№шьшќшьфш№шєишєшєшифиьи№и№иєиєидиќьќьфќфќфдфдфдфдhЈ@šhё€h18“hЭbнh=Mhш#†h @ЮhФRЫhв^іhL hQ6џTЙСФХPћ !%!`!k!­!З!@"E"O"“"Ж"ш"# ##$$6$V$Z$y$›$ž$T%w%Л&в'г'с'т')()=)f)Ђ*С*х+ч+ ,:,;,K,L,‘,’,Ё,р,-+-9.D.U.`.‹.ž.и.т.7/E/t/•//Й/Џ0А0ѕ0ќ0ќјќјє№ьєшєьєфєф№ф№ьрфми№и№иши№идрдрдрдрараЬаЬ№Ь№ЬиЬШФ№Ш№Ш№ШрРрРрРрРМРИРИhј*хh Ahш?ёhv hVEХh’hёAХhСОhwыhйo$hяWh—d h1~hв^іh @ЮhМ>щhЈ@šh=MHќ0%131A1e1.2M2V2c2A3B3D3N3•3С3а3$4.45565d5„5‹5Ž5Ы5з5н5т5.6Q6Ъ6Э6е6ф6х6ц6ч6щ6"797@7B7X7k7q7t7Ž7Ч7Ы7а7№7ђ738M8k8t8u8x8ќјєќј№ј№јьшфјр№рмрфрфифифимифифдиаиаиаид№аиаиафа№ашмдЬ№дЬфh5y)hIh=Mhy#сh AhwУhћh?ht•h’hяWh @Юhј*хhш?ё:,1hА‚. АЦA!А"А# $ %ААФАФ Ф†œ@@ёџ@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DAђџЁD Default Paragraph FontViѓџГV  Table Normal :V і4ж4ж laі (kєџС(No List H™ђH йo$ Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJx0Fџџџџ`aЧШС Т фх` a ’$“$B+C+D+v0w0z0˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€Йќ0x8 !"x8x8џџ † ­‡œИˆЕ‰МГŠ\Ÿ!‹ ƒŒDЪTЬŽ4М !jmow››@@Я-Я-z0 lnu{ЁЁFFж-ж-z0 9 *€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€State€8 *€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€City€9*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€place€ Є<     ahЭдAH7CHNSY] b x…ЅЌЖТЯеx&&Q'Z'l(y(—-ž-Э.д.C0M0z0втQTozввеВ'Й'Э.п.z03333333z0z0-х,›ZдIv ’=Mrйo$5y)yl+Lz2ћh? AwnCяW1~ё€ш#†18“t•C–Ј@šL —d Б§@Б~aОСОwУёAХVEХФRЫ @Ю€:б@лЭbнy#сј*хП3щМ>щwыш?ёв^іјQ6џџ@€44Аd44x0p@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArial5& ‡za€џTahoma"qˆ№аh&ыБ&&ыБ&гjЌf;=)W;=)W № ДД24d`0`02ƒ№мIP)№џ?фџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџћh?2џџ_Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-based Management,Authorised UserOwnerўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0р˜ ,8DT dp  œ Ј ДРШаиф`Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-based Management,Authorised UserNormalOwner2Microsoft Office Word@@jХ|ЈЧ@DrOЂCЧ@DrOЂCЧ;=)ўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0\ hp˜ Ј АИРШ а <фUniversity of GlasgowW`0Ј `Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths and Total Nonsense: Profiting from Evidence-based Management, Title  !"#ўџџџ%&'()*+ўџџџ-./01234ўџџџ6789:;<ўџџџ>?@ABCDўџџџ§џџџGўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РFАљжaЂCЧI€Data џџџџџџџџџџџџ$1Tableџџџџ,›WordDocumentџџџџ.FSummaryInformation(џџџџџџџџџџџџ5DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџ=CompObjџџџџџџџџџџџџqџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq