- Email: [email protected]
Re-inventing the corporation
Focus o n B o o k s
79
Reviews of current books discnssing subjects on the horizons of business activities, particularly those on controversial issues being encountered by both practitioners and teachers, will be considered for publication. Manuscript guidelines are available upon request.
The Adaptive Corporation by Alvin T o N e r
Re-inventing the Corporation by J o h n Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene
Michael Parrish, the reviewer, is the director of the School of Business-School of Public and Environmental Affairs Library, Indiana University, Bloomington. ark Twain once observed, " T h e art o f p r o p h e c y is very difficult, especially with respect to the future." It is most f o r t u n a t e for the futurists that people rarely b o t h e r to go back and read their books. What at one time a p p e a r e d to be sweeping prognostications l a t e r looks like h y p e r b o l i c nonsense. Alvin T o N e r ' s new book appears to be very m u c h like his previous hooks: a lot o f sound and fury signifying nothing. T h e introduction sets the tone:
M
A dozen years ago Alvin Toftter prepared a secret report for the world's largest corporation. At first suppressed because it proposed a startling and controversial strategy, it became a corporate "samizdat" document, copies passing surreptitiously from hand to hand in photocopy tbrm. Today this is acknowledged as a management classic.
This is T o N e r at his most humble. T h a n k s to McGraw Hill, this landmark study is available to a n y o n e who cares to spend $15.95, and thus have the o p p o r t u n i t y to h e a r the self- and media-appointed prophet thunder against c o r p o r a t e leaders for their shortsightedness and for missing the gospel according to T o N e r . Toffler's ideas can be divided into either self-evident truths or predictions about c o r p o r a t e America that alr e a d y have b e e n r e f u t e d by the remarkable economic recovery of 1983-84. T h e problem with T o N e r , h o w e v e r , stems f r o m his M a r x i s t youth. C o m m a n d i n g speaking fees o f $10,000 and up, he can hardly now be d e e m e d a Marxist. But because Marxism is m o r e a matter o f tempera m e n t than ideology, T o N e r continues to show the same a r r o g a n c e and exhilarating flights o f fancy that characterize the writings o f his f o r m e r mentor.
"Toffler's ideas can be divided into either self-evident truths or predictions about corporate America that already have been refuted by the remarkable economic recovery of 198384." I
nlike T o N e r , whose roots are in Marx, the book by Naisbitt and A b u r d e n e harks back to the sixties. T h e authors are or have been "into" reincarnation, vegetarianism, and
U
Business Horizons / January-February 1986
80
spiritualism, as well as the more bizarre lunacies of "est" and "rolfing." Their goal is to "resonate." Their primary suggestion, which they base on a hunch, is that corporations should respond more fully to the spiritual (read: narcissistic) needs of the employees. For analysis you need only to read their defense of "comparable worth" and their prediction of its success (written obviously before the recent legal setbacks). Unless one is engaged in writing books on futurology, Naisbitt's suggestions could be a sure road to filing Chapter 11, a circumstance with which Naisbitt has more than a nodding acquaintance. In the final analysis Re-inventing the Corporation is nothing but a 1980s version of The Greening of America. Naisbitt's book appeals to the same narcissistic impulses as its predecessor. In a few years it will be remembered with the same l a u g h a b l e contempt as Charles Reich's book is remembered today. It is safe to say that by then there will be a new crop of gurus. T h e puzzling and crucial question here is not what Toffler and Naisbitt have to say, but why corporate leaders are so willing to spend their stockholders' money in order to be told that they, America's executives, are doing an awful job. Pure masochism is surely at work. Ever since the sixties one common value--quite possibly the only one shared by all segments of American society--is an obsession with avoiding risk. Such phenomena as our timid foreign policy, the mushrooming of the welfare state, the rash of law suits, the preoccupation with environment, health, and nutrition--in fact, the whole gamut of self-indulgent behavior can be traced to this obsession. In such scenarios, however, the f u t u r e r e m a i n s the unknown factor and a source of deep anxiety. Here the futurists find their niche. T h e left, as usual, started the ball rolling back in the sixties with the Club of Rome's forecast o f g l o o m a n d doom. Today, the usually sensible Governor Richard L a m m of Colorado continues this tradition in his newly published Megatraumas (what
would futurists do without "mega"?). Not all leftist forecasters of the 1960s were pessimists. Charles Reich, in The Greening of America, envisioned an America dominated by "new consciousness," an America in which we all would live happily ever after by modeling our lives after that shining example of civility and harmony, the rock group. T h e conservatives, who should know better, have also abandoned their traditional skepticism and produced their own branch of futurology. Julian Simon and Ben Wattenberg, both formerly men of the left, followed the footsteps of the late Herman Kahn in visualizing America as the next Singapore if we would but practice unbridled free enterprise and lower' the almost nonexistent barriers to immigration.
"In the final analysis Re-in-
venting the Corporation is nothing but a 1980s version
of The Greening of America . . . . In a few years it will
I do not expressly include the futurologists among the citizenry of Pluto's Republic. They are recent immig.rants, after all, but they are naturahzed now and I very much hope that my essay does something deeply to undermine the pretensions of their weird farrago of scholarly pretensions and barefaced guesswork. It is not their wrongness so much as their pretensions to rightness that have brought economic predictions and the theory that underlies them into well-deserved contempt. The dogmatic selfassurance anct the assertive confidence of futurists are additional causes of grievance and self-defeating traits among people eager to pass ibr scientists. Sir Peter is perhaps a bit harsh. In the final analysis, although futurism has no rational basis, its practitioners are mainly guilty of selling hope to the gullible in a field already crowded with psychiatrists, evangelists, and, of course, politicians. Lincoln Steffens wrote the real epitaph for futurism back in 1931 after visiting the Soviet Union: "I have been over into the future, and it works." []
be remembered with the same Alvin Toffler, The Adaptive Corporation. New York: McGraw Hill, 1985. laughable contempt as Charles 217 pp. $15.95. Reich's book is remembered to- John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene, Reday. It is safe to say that by inventing the Corporation. New York: Warner, 1985. 305 pp. $17.50. then there will be a new crop of gurus." It is difficult to find a single issue on which Congressman Newt Gingrich, a l e a d i n g conservative, a n d Senator Albert Gore,Jr., a leading liberal Democrat (who recently opined after a private session with J o h n Naisbitt that it was time to "rethink the nation-state system"), both agree. Yet t o g e t h e r t h e y have s p o n s o r e d the "Critical T r e n d s A s s e s s m e n t " Act. This proposal would create something akin to a Federal Office of Prophecy where h u n d r e d s of bureaucrats would study "trends" and predict forthcoming disasters. This is the stuff of which nightmares are made. Those who take all of this seriously, however, are well advised to read Nobel Prize winner Sir Peter Medawar's trenchant remarks in Pluto's Republic:
79
Reviews of current books discnssing subjects on the horizons of business activities, particularly those on controversial issues being encountered by both practitioners and teachers, will be considered for publication. Manuscript guidelines are available upon request.
The Adaptive Corporation by Alvin T o N e r
Re-inventing the Corporation by J o h n Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene
Michael Parrish, the reviewer, is the director of the School of Business-School of Public and Environmental Affairs Library, Indiana University, Bloomington. ark Twain once observed, " T h e art o f p r o p h e c y is very difficult, especially with respect to the future." It is most f o r t u n a t e for the futurists that people rarely b o t h e r to go back and read their books. What at one time a p p e a r e d to be sweeping prognostications l a t e r looks like h y p e r b o l i c nonsense. Alvin T o N e r ' s new book appears to be very m u c h like his previous hooks: a lot o f sound and fury signifying nothing. T h e introduction sets the tone:
M
A dozen years ago Alvin Toftter prepared a secret report for the world's largest corporation. At first suppressed because it proposed a startling and controversial strategy, it became a corporate "samizdat" document, copies passing surreptitiously from hand to hand in photocopy tbrm. Today this is acknowledged as a management classic.
This is T o N e r at his most humble. T h a n k s to McGraw Hill, this landmark study is available to a n y o n e who cares to spend $15.95, and thus have the o p p o r t u n i t y to h e a r the self- and media-appointed prophet thunder against c o r p o r a t e leaders for their shortsightedness and for missing the gospel according to T o N e r . Toffler's ideas can be divided into either self-evident truths or predictions about c o r p o r a t e America that alr e a d y have b e e n r e f u t e d by the remarkable economic recovery of 1983-84. T h e problem with T o N e r , h o w e v e r , stems f r o m his M a r x i s t youth. C o m m a n d i n g speaking fees o f $10,000 and up, he can hardly now be d e e m e d a Marxist. But because Marxism is m o r e a matter o f tempera m e n t than ideology, T o N e r continues to show the same a r r o g a n c e and exhilarating flights o f fancy that characterize the writings o f his f o r m e r mentor.
"Toffler's ideas can be divided into either self-evident truths or predictions about corporate America that already have been refuted by the remarkable economic recovery of 198384." I
nlike T o N e r , whose roots are in Marx, the book by Naisbitt and A b u r d e n e harks back to the sixties. T h e authors are or have been "into" reincarnation, vegetarianism, and
U
Business Horizons / January-February 1986
80
spiritualism, as well as the more bizarre lunacies of "est" and "rolfing." Their goal is to "resonate." Their primary suggestion, which they base on a hunch, is that corporations should respond more fully to the spiritual (read: narcissistic) needs of the employees. For analysis you need only to read their defense of "comparable worth" and their prediction of its success (written obviously before the recent legal setbacks). Unless one is engaged in writing books on futurology, Naisbitt's suggestions could be a sure road to filing Chapter 11, a circumstance with which Naisbitt has more than a nodding acquaintance. In the final analysis Re-inventing the Corporation is nothing but a 1980s version of The Greening of America. Naisbitt's book appeals to the same narcissistic impulses as its predecessor. In a few years it will be remembered with the same l a u g h a b l e contempt as Charles Reich's book is remembered today. It is safe to say that by then there will be a new crop of gurus. T h e puzzling and crucial question here is not what Toffler and Naisbitt have to say, but why corporate leaders are so willing to spend their stockholders' money in order to be told that they, America's executives, are doing an awful job. Pure masochism is surely at work. Ever since the sixties one common value--quite possibly the only one shared by all segments of American society--is an obsession with avoiding risk. Such phenomena as our timid foreign policy, the mushrooming of the welfare state, the rash of law suits, the preoccupation with environment, health, and nutrition--in fact, the whole gamut of self-indulgent behavior can be traced to this obsession. In such scenarios, however, the f u t u r e r e m a i n s the unknown factor and a source of deep anxiety. Here the futurists find their niche. T h e left, as usual, started the ball rolling back in the sixties with the Club of Rome's forecast o f g l o o m a n d doom. Today, the usually sensible Governor Richard L a m m of Colorado continues this tradition in his newly published Megatraumas (what
would futurists do without "mega"?). Not all leftist forecasters of the 1960s were pessimists. Charles Reich, in The Greening of America, envisioned an America dominated by "new consciousness," an America in which we all would live happily ever after by modeling our lives after that shining example of civility and harmony, the rock group. T h e conservatives, who should know better, have also abandoned their traditional skepticism and produced their own branch of futurology. Julian Simon and Ben Wattenberg, both formerly men of the left, followed the footsteps of the late Herman Kahn in visualizing America as the next Singapore if we would but practice unbridled free enterprise and lower' the almost nonexistent barriers to immigration.
"In the final analysis Re-in-
venting the Corporation is nothing but a 1980s version
of The Greening of America . . . . In a few years it will
I do not expressly include the futurologists among the citizenry of Pluto's Republic. They are recent immig.rants, after all, but they are naturahzed now and I very much hope that my essay does something deeply to undermine the pretensions of their weird farrago of scholarly pretensions and barefaced guesswork. It is not their wrongness so much as their pretensions to rightness that have brought economic predictions and the theory that underlies them into well-deserved contempt. The dogmatic selfassurance anct the assertive confidence of futurists are additional causes of grievance and self-defeating traits among people eager to pass ibr scientists. Sir Peter is perhaps a bit harsh. In the final analysis, although futurism has no rational basis, its practitioners are mainly guilty of selling hope to the gullible in a field already crowded with psychiatrists, evangelists, and, of course, politicians. Lincoln Steffens wrote the real epitaph for futurism back in 1931 after visiting the Soviet Union: "I have been over into the future, and it works." []
be remembered with the same Alvin Toffler, The Adaptive Corporation. New York: McGraw Hill, 1985. laughable contempt as Charles 217 pp. $15.95. Reich's book is remembered to- John Naisbitt and Patricia Aburdene, Reday. It is safe to say that by inventing the Corporation. New York: Warner, 1985. 305 pp. $17.50. then there will be a new crop of gurus." It is difficult to find a single issue on which Congressman Newt Gingrich, a l e a d i n g conservative, a n d Senator Albert Gore,Jr., a leading liberal Democrat (who recently opined after a private session with J o h n Naisbitt that it was time to "rethink the nation-state system"), both agree. Yet t o g e t h e r t h e y have s p o n s o r e d the "Critical T r e n d s A s s e s s m e n t " Act. This proposal would create something akin to a Federal Office of Prophecy where h u n d r e d s of bureaucrats would study "trends" and predict forthcoming disasters. This is the stuff of which nightmares are made. Those who take all of this seriously, however, are well advised to read Nobel Prize winner Sir Peter Medawar's trenchant remarks in Pluto's Republic: