Who played the most important part on D-Day - the "Management" or the Soldiers?
It is generally agreed that the successful landing in Normandy on D-Day was the result of competent management, clear allocation of responsibilities and tasks, and not least co-operation and commitment. Everybody was motivated. Everybody did their best. The proof of this was in the results. Nobody would dream of giving the entire credit for this operation to the "management". It was successful only because all "staff members" on all levels took responsibility and did their very best. Organisations fight too. They fight to penetrate new markets - to maintain market shares - to grow - to survive. But traditionally, the manager is in focus. If the organisation is successful, it is the result of good management. If it is unsuccessful, it is the result of bad management. The manager is considered responsible for practically everything. Heavy responsibility often leads to caution. Most people will be inclined to use the "safe" methods, because they have been tried before and were successful then. This is dangerous in a changing world.

Employeeship is new thinking.
The world around us is changing faster than ever before. The management thinking that used to create impressive results, now often creates lots of problems. We have reached a point where new thinking is required. Employeeship is new thinking. Employeeship is a new effective concept that makes it possible to create a strong commitment in everybody in the organisation. It is a new culture where management and staff share the responsibility for success and failure.

Responsibility, loyalty and initiative are key.
Employeeship is based on the knowledge that practically everybody in the organisation has enormous unused resources at their disposal - viz. the unused potential of the individual staff member. They are in fact the organisation's most valuable resource, but only very few are capable of activating it in the best possible way. Employeeship is a TMI concept that releases and utilises this unused energy and knowledge. It is not enough to appeal to the brain by "sending" the responsibility to the staff. You also need a positive response. The staff should both want and dare take responsibility. A sense of responsibility is necessary if all employees are to display loyalty and to take the initiative to make things function and to improve and develop the organisation.

Everybody is a manager -But there are many "classifications".
An organisation needs to be managed. No doubt about it. Therefore, it is not a question of taking the responsibility for managing the organisation away from the managers and handing it over to the staff. We neither believe in collective management, management through committees or the like. But we do believe that the individual staff member can be made the "manager" of their own area of responsibility. But this requires a change of attitude - in both managers and staff.

If the manager does not have the fundamental trust that the staff can take useful and independent initiatives, the staff will not take responsibility, but will leave the initiative and the responsibility to the managers. Employeeship combines the demand for production, effectiveness and survival with the self-realisation of the individual staff member. Employeeship makes it possible for the individual staff member to develop through their work and to unite their resources in a collective performance with the other staff members of the organisation. But the manager should still walk ahead and show the way.