Philippe d'Iribarne is one of the most astute analysts of French culture, society and management methods. Sadly his classic book, The Logic of Honor (2003)--La logique de l'honneur (1989)" is no longer available in English.
A couple of days ago I came across an interview he gave about French Management to the magazine Liaisons Sociales in 2008. The interview, between d'Iribarne and Eric Béal, was contained in an article by Béal titled Les gros défauts du management à la française. Below is a quick translation.
"The French are Frightened of Being Treated Like Lackeys
Philippe d'Iribarne, research director at the CNRS (the French national research institution), an engineer who graduated from the elite Polytechnique school and a graduate of the Insitute of Political Science in Paris (IE), published in 1989 the book The Logic of Honor and in 2006 "French Strangeness".
What is the difference in behavior between the Anglo-Saxon (i.e. American, British... manager) and the French Manager? Unlike the American manager, the French manager does not set specific goals for his staff, because that sort of behavior could be interpreted as him challenging the employee's professional knowledge about what needs to be done. This leaves room for a lot of autonomy, but also the risk of arbitrary evaluation. A staff member can be evaluated on a notion as vague as whether "he knows how to do his job".
How do you explain these differences?
They are related about how people have decided to live together in a country. In the United States, the citizen is wary of seeing somebody else deciding his destiny for him. That is why the notion of the fair deal and of the contract is so strong. An employee is subject only to the duties to which he has explicitly consented, whether they come directly from his work contract or from the objectives that are set. In France, the fear upon which all other fears are built is that of being treated contemptuously, like a servant or lackey, and that is what complicates relations with the managerial hierarchy or with the customer.
Are we more authoritarian in France? The French manager makes decisions but he rarely checks on how they are implemented. He doesn't listen much to his staff or show them to their best advantage. This situation, which produces a mixture of frustration and resentment, isn't incompatible with a high level of effectiveness in operations because the employees have this understanding about what constitutes the "honorable aspects of the job they are doing". This notion of honor (logic of personal honor), ensures that the staff member will be proud of his product, his job and his company. This understanding on the part of the staff member pushes him to do his best in his own little space, even if he has a very negative view of management.
Haven't Anglo-Saxon methods introduced into France changed things? French corporations are very keen on Anglo-Saxon management methods. But with regard to their decision-making style, evaluating the contribution of staff members or managing relationships with their clients they don't put into practice what they preach. Instead of aping a management style that has its own set of limitations, most notably the difficulty of defining specific goals with becoming cartoonish, it would be wise to make better to make use of our own potential.
Éric Béal"
A couple of days ago I came across an interview he gave about French Management to the magazine Liaisons Sociales in 2008. The interview, between d'Iribarne and Eric Béal, was contained in an article by Béal titled Les gros défauts du management à la française. Below is a quick translation.
"The French are Frightened of Being Treated Like Lackeys
Philippe d'Iribarne, research director at the CNRS (the French national research institution), an engineer who graduated from the elite Polytechnique school and a graduate of the Insitute of Political Science in Paris (IE), published in 1989 the book The Logic of Honor and in 2006 "French Strangeness".
What is the difference in behavior between the Anglo-Saxon (i.e. American, British... manager) and the French Manager? Unlike the American manager, the French manager does not set specific goals for his staff, because that sort of behavior could be interpreted as him challenging the employee's professional knowledge about what needs to be done. This leaves room for a lot of autonomy, but also the risk of arbitrary evaluation. A staff member can be evaluated on a notion as vague as whether "he knows how to do his job".
How do you explain these differences?
They are related about how people have decided to live together in a country. In the United States, the citizen is wary of seeing somebody else deciding his destiny for him. That is why the notion of the fair deal and of the contract is so strong. An employee is subject only to the duties to which he has explicitly consented, whether they come directly from his work contract or from the objectives that are set. In France, the fear upon which all other fears are built is that of being treated contemptuously, like a servant or lackey, and that is what complicates relations with the managerial hierarchy or with the customer.
Are we more authoritarian in France? The French manager makes decisions but he rarely checks on how they are implemented. He doesn't listen much to his staff or show them to their best advantage. This situation, which produces a mixture of frustration and resentment, isn't incompatible with a high level of effectiveness in operations because the employees have this understanding about what constitutes the "honorable aspects of the job they are doing". This notion of honor (logic of personal honor), ensures that the staff member will be proud of his product, his job and his company. This understanding on the part of the staff member pushes him to do his best in his own little space, even if he has a very negative view of management.
Haven't Anglo-Saxon methods introduced into France changed things? French corporations are very keen on Anglo-Saxon management methods. But with regard to their decision-making style, evaluating the contribution of staff members or managing relationships with their clients they don't put into practice what they preach. Instead of aping a management style that has its own set of limitations, most notably the difficulty of defining specific goals with becoming cartoonish, it would be wise to make better to make use of our own potential.
Éric Béal"