Does anyone here have any experience with Model-Netics? My company was recently acquired by an organization that believes heavily in these management techniques. As one of their managers, I am required to take and complete a certification in Model-Netics. I have no issues with this, but I'm curious if anyone else has used Model-Netics, and how it compares/contrasts with what you've seen from Manager Tools. I'm a big Manager Tools fan, as are the managers that work for me, and I want to be able to let them know how the two camps relate, or don't as the case may be.
In a nutshell, Model-Netics provides 151 models representing and/or describing management ideas and concepts. The idea being that if you have these models at your finger tips, you will be more able to understand different management scenarios and apply them to solving problems. Model-Netics is owned and managed by "Main Event Management". The models themselves are meant to solve problems in nine main areas:
- Poor Communication
- High Turnover
- Increasing Costs
- Low Morale
- Too Much Change
- Ineffective Delegation
- inadequate Control
- Poor Planning
- Ineffective Management Development
Having now sat through the first series of classes, I can say that some of the models are effective, but there were no real "a ha!" moments. They do not present the same type of practical advice that Manager Tools does, but rather, try to equip you with a mental model to understand the type of scenario you're viewing. In a way, I see them as complementary - Model-Netics gives you a quick categorization, Manager Tools tells you how to actually solve the problem.
If anyone else has experience here, I would really appreciate input.
Yes, not bad, not complete
I'm familiar with Model-netics. It's not a wrong system, in the sense that its models are helpful and understandable. I generally like some of their philosophies. They aren't willing to have a manager spend all their time saving one employee, for instance.
As is often the case, theories like these are good to know, but don't really give applicable guidance. What I've seen happen is (a) a lot of situations that come up don't fit neatly into the models, which means some try to force them into whatever model they have (not good, and sometimes happens with our stuff too), and (b) the actions others take which are NOT specifically recommended by the models (curiously, to me) are seen to be the model itself, and senior people who misread the models act as if their way IS the model, which it's not. (This causes many to twist the model into a justification of their previous managerial behaviors).
My recommendation: go to the classes, learn what is applicable, and use it when it makes sense. It also probably makes sense to downplay "Manager Tools" as an overarching concept and simply use our recommendations. Otherwise, you may be seen as contradicting the teachings of the firm, even if your stuff works better. We've told folks before that if their boss objected to One on Ones, stop talking about them, and quietly keep doing them.
Cheers all,
Mark
Mark, Thanks for the
Mark,
Thanks for the recommendation.
The first class was interesting. The models presented definitely have real-world application, but if you don't have the context for how to apply them, I can see where mishaps occur.
I will definitely take your advise RE touting manager tools in the short-term. I use the trinity semi-religiously, and would be devastated if someone suggested I stop using it in favor of a different system. It works too well to give up.
Again, thanks for your response.
Warm Regards,
Bill