Management: Silence is a ticket to public irrelevance

But try to name someone in the field of business management who holds the same kind of cross-border influence and the task becomes harder than it should be. In management, that tradition has long faded. The result is an intellectual vacuum and a leadership culture that risks losing its connection with society.

Also Read: Business bestsellers survive but where did management gurus go?

This is not about talent. Management has no shortage of brilliant thinkers who are also articulate. The difference lies in the structures around the discipline. In economics and policy, institutions such as think tanks, universities and multilateral bodies provide scholars with legitimacy, visibility and the time to refine ideas. The stakes are high and the media seeks interpreters who can explain complex developments. There is a long tradition of publishing big ideas and putting forth frameworks that enter the public consciousness.

Management once had its own pantheon. From the late 1960s to the late 1990s, during the high tide of global corporate expansion, figures like Peter Drucker, Tom Peters, Gary Hamel, Michael Porter and Rosabeth Moss Kanter were more than researchers or consultants. 

They were idea originators who shaped the language of business with concepts like ‘core competence,’ ‘competitive advantage’ and ‘management by objectives.’ Drucker’s take on the ‘knowledge worker’ was a social commentary that also offered a business insight. Peters’ In Search of Excellence read like a manifesto for a new corporate ethos. They influenced not only companies, but work culture too.

Also Read: When will business books focus more on corporate failures than successes?

Today, that public voice has gone mute. Management largely operates in a closed circuit. The most valuable insights are often built on proprietary data or some sensitive strategy that cannot be shared openly. Leaders face relentless quarterly pressures that reward execution over reflection. Many of today’s brightest minds choose the commercial route of consulting—monetizing their ideas behind closed doors for paying clients, rather than sharing them with the wider world.

The publishing landscape has also changed. The golden era of sweeping management books has given way to microcontent: LinkedIn posts, gated newsletters and closed-door keynote speeches.  

In hyper-competitive markets, public commentary is sometimes seen as a risk to a firm’s competitive advantage, rather than a contribution to collective understanding. This worsens the discipline’s intellectual vacuum. Management thinking is abundant but scattered, locked in silos, behind paywalls or buried in client decks. Rarely does it break into the public sphere with sufficient force to spark a broad and enduring debate. That is a loss not just for business, but for society.

Also Read: The best business books tend to be about music and sports

Some might argue that this is fine. After all, management is a discipline best practised, not preached. 

Not so. 

Without public frameworks, we lose the shared vocabulary that helps organizations and industries align. Without public voices, management forfeits the chance to shape how business is understood in relation to society. Without business leaders willing to step into the public square, we risk producing executives who are operationally adept but not inspirational. 

When public intellectuals disappear from any field, the conversation contracts. The cross-pollination of ideas stops. In management, a discipline that draws from economics, sociology, psychology and technology, this narrowing is especially costly. It weakens our ability to place business thinking within the context of larger cultural and economic forces shaping our world.

Also Read: Why Viktor Frankl is the father of the self-help genre

Nostalgia for the ‘guru era’ won’t help. Public engagement becoming a key aspect of leadership will. Senior executives could share frameworks and philosophies instead of just their quarterly wins. Consultants could release some of their thinking into the public domain, not only to market their services but also to strengthen the discipline. Academics could translate research into accessible language and join mainstream debates. The media could grant good management thinkers the same treatment they accord economists and policy experts when it comes to global issues.

Public intellectuals don’t just interpret the world, but turn private insights into a public good. Management must reclaim its place in the public sphere or risk leaving the stage to faux gurus selling ‘masterclasses’ online. Management will stop shaping the future and start following it. And a discipline that hides its best thinking deserves the irrelevance it suffers.

The author is a marketing leader and member of the board of directors, Effie Lions Foundation.