The case study of a Shared Service of Siemens over three decades: how executives with trendy management strategies, self-oriented managers and employees, failed a renowned in-house professional services business. Many parts of Siemens suffered from a plethora of disruptive management theories between 1980-2010. This systemic management failure also has relevance for other business corporations.

The biggest listed companies of the world’s major economies are often foreign-owned. Their top managers are subservient to Anglo-Saxon-dominated capital markets. This generates an inherent conflict of interest between these profit-driven corporations and the socio-market democratic system of many European countries. Read this compelling argument for a renewed balance between corporate management purposes and government regulatory policy.

For 50 years, MBA-influenced corporate management culture has been spreading in the USA; it is also on the rise in Europe. This style of management is essentially wealth extracting, short-term, inhibits innovation, weakens corporate cohesion, and harms the common good. Six cases of corporate management failure at world-renowned US corporations illustrate the negative systemic side of this culture.

For the past forty years, most major corporations have been managed as "profit machines". This management behavior was justified by Shareholder Value Theory. This is a simple idea, easy to understand, and was adopted by many business managers. In 2019, in a "revolutionary" statement on corporate governance, top U.S. CEOs renounced shareholder value and pledged themselves to Stakeholder Value. However, there is a gap between rhetoric and reality. This thinkpiece exposes that deficit and proposes a solution.

Many believe they know Peter Drucker well. Few are aware that his thinking is strongly influenced by a Christian ethos. Drucker believed that management must be a moral force. This is true especially today when, to an unacceptable degree, managers are exploiting the 'moral-free' market for their own personal advantage.

The revival of this Manageristic doctrine is a retrograde step. Agility and competitiveness will suffer.

Do senior corporate decision-makers who hire mercenary Managerists as 'turn-around champions' know what they are doing, and what this will do to the company over the long term?