Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Work Management

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Work Management

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be a WP:OR essay that is not an encyclopedic topic. This is not written from a neutral POV and it really just reads like a term paper. We need more reasons to speedily delete these, but they don't exist yet. — Timneu22 · talk 15:02, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; probably should have been G11. Only sources are from the article's author and link to his commercial site to sell the product pitched on the page (I've just removed this). Rough to find any other sources as the concept is fairly generic. Kuru (talk) 23:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with supervisor. There are probably other articles here about this topic but supervisor seems to be a good place to start. Whatever it's called, it is a highly notable topic. And, as Wikipedia is almost completely lacking in effective management, it would be good to improve our coverage of this field. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which information would be merged? I see nothing worth saving, because it's not written in an encyclopedic tone. — Timneu22 · talk 12:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This article seems to have been created to advertise a product and is basically an essay. Nick-D (talk) 08:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Work Management is a strategy for planning and getting work done through people. The management of work is distributed through most people involved (not just managers).... Key components to be managed are:

* People - doing the work and affected by the work (stakeholders),
* Tasks – what needs to be achieved,
* Actions – the work to complete tasks, and
* Management processes –processes that make work flow

Work management coordinates the dynamic relationships between the key components, so work gets done. Work management uses a distributed management paradigm and technology, rather than traditional manager centric approaches....

If somebody I managed started to write like this, they'd be cleaning out their desk. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Author's Comments

I have tried to incorporate the feedback provided so far. My goal was to provide a framework for others to contribute to an important area of management.

I agree that Wikipedia needs more on effective management. Before this article was submitted, when you searched on work management it linked to project management (that is only a small part of work management).

I believe that work management fills a hole in Wikipedia’s offering on management. Wikipedia has a lot of entries about emerging technologies (like the cloud and mobile devices), but not a lot about practical management methods to effectively exploit current and emerging technologies.

The fundamental difference between traditional top down management and work management is that work management is distributed and organic. As an analogy, traditional management methods are like the intensively managed Encyclopaedia Britannica approach and work management methods are like Wikipedia.

The original ideas for work management were developed 20 years ago, but the technologies required for implementation were not available. They are now available and leading managers are looking for a work management solution. It is a bit like flying. The ideas about how to fly were around for a long time before the technologies required to construct an aircraft were available.

The suggestion to merge work management into supervisor is not understood. Supervisors are an integral part of the traditional top down management approaches. The key to work management is that all levels of management (senior managers, managers and supervisors) plus people doing the work can all flexibly manage the work together in real-time.

I am keen to have a dialog and do what needs to be done to make this entry work, because I believe it will make a significant contribution to management knowledge and the way people work. Workmanager (talk) 05:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given your username and the thesis-pushing style in which the article is written, there seems to be a clear WP:COI problem here. — Timneu22 · talk 12:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that I have been working in the work management field for over 20 years. I would have thought that an entry by someone who understands the topic would be preferred by Wikipedia. The PhD was only mentioned as a reliable source of how long work management has been around. I have edited the entry to make it neutral. My desire is to put a stake in the ground for work management so others can think about it and improve the Wikipedia entry. --Workmanager (talk) 02:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per G11, WP:OR, WP:COI. SnottyWong talk 23:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator, and I agree with Smerdis of Tlön. --Nuujinn (talk) 19:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.