One of the important voices in the discourse of management is management guru Gary Hamel. He proposes business frameworks that are based on continuous innovation. His argument is that the modern company invests more in the social media in a bid to gain profit but only to the consumer’s advantage. The social media are, in fact benefiting the consumer through removal of information asymmetry. His proposition is adoption of business frameworks driven by perpetual innovativeness. The innovation may be small but consistent and continual. This is the only way to gain value of investment and maintain a competitive edge (Osterwalder & Pigneur 2002).
Hamel also proposes business frameworks centered on a company’s competencies rather than its actual activities. This is under the understanding that business models have a small lifespan and continued pursuit of a business objective on the same model will make it misses opportunities. Hamel’s frameworks are invaluable and applicable but not foolproof. Managers must also realize that there are gains arising from adherence to a model that inspires a sense of a business culture. These models may be formulated to stand the tests of time with limited modification. Cisco is an example of an organization that has a model defying Hamel’s contention (Betz 2002).
Hamel is a respectable corporate figure with vast honors such as the most influential managers. In his work, ‘The Future of Management’, Hamel predicts correctly that changes in business environments and advancements in technology will present far-reaching effects on leadership approaches. However, there is no evidence that adaptations to the new changes demand new management paradigms. There is also an inherent weakness in the proposition that modern and future management will be driven by innovation, inclusive decision-making and market orientation. His models suffer from the revolutionary proposal from all modern management practices (Reiss 2001).