Revised Paper

[From Fred Nickols (2004.01.08.0857)] --

A new version of the "Managerial Performance" paper has been posted to my
web site. It reflects more than just Rick's earlier comments; it also
reflects those of Bill Powers and a considerable amount of input from Phil
Runkel who gave me several pages of detailed comments and suggestions. I've
added some comments about micro-management to the list of implications and
tried to make a case for interesting readers in the underlying theory. I've
also inserted a link to my earlier paper, "A Control Theory View of Human
Performance." I'm still pondering Bruce G's suggestion to incorporate one
or two extended examples and will likely ask him to say a little more on
that score. Ditto for Bill Williams' suggestion about pointing out how PCT
explains much management theory. So, there might be yet another version
down the road.

As before, the "Managerial Performance" paper can be found at the following
URL:

http://home.att.net/~essays/managerialperformance.pdf

The "Control Theory View of Human Performance" paper can be found at:

http://home.att.net/~OPSINC/controltheoryview.pdf

Thanks again to all who took time to read the "Managerial Performance" paper
and offer up suggestions.

Regards,

Fred Nickols
Distance Consulting
"Assistance at a Distance"
nickols@att.net
www.nickols.us

[From Bill Williams 8 January 2003 11:50 AM CST]

Fred,

When I suggested that you might include a claim that you can explain why some of the more successful management theories work work, the main example I had was Demming's work. But, I could not bring up his name.

I am not familiar with what's considered successful work in management theory, but it seemed to me that if it works, then somehow or other it has got to be based upon control theory. Is there a standard list of stuff that people agree works, or is management theory still in a process of sorting things out?

bill Williams