Management Lessons from Harry Potter

(Picture Source: Forbes.com)


Lessons are learnt from various sources throughout history. After the Industrial revolution management has often sought to learn from diverse sources.
Management has derived inspiration from all sorts of sources- History (the Art of War), Sports (writings of Vince Lombardi) and Politics (Machiavelli’s The Prince), among other things. Literature and Fiction has also inspired management in many ways. There are many management lessons to be learnt from the literature classics. As I was re-reading the Harry Potter series I suddenly realized that there are a lot of management lessons from the series.

Harry Potter is one of the best loved books by children and many adults alike. Some attribute it to J.K Rowling’s vivid imagination, unraveling mysteries more complex in every progressing book. Others say it was good marketing fuelled by the reach of the online medium. For me the most compelling reason for being a Harry Potter fan is discovering something new every time I re-read the series. This time it is the parallels I can draw between the worlds of Death Eaters & Charms and business management.
Imagine Order of the Phoenix (OoP) to be a company. It would be one where the visionary (Dumbledore himself) sets clear goals and like minded employees are inspired to join. Irrespective of age, race or skill levels, recruits are hired by their commitment to the vision (in this case – a world in which wizards\witches and Muggles (Non magic people) live in harmony) and trained to become capable for doing their job.


The competitor to the Order of the Phoenix is Deatheaters Inc, led by Lord Voldemort. Employees are coerced to join and are afraid to leave. Predictably most are picked based on their race (or blood status) and are more or less of the same age with similar skills. Not very different from the real world, where companies often prefer to choose candidates from pedigreed backgrounds (IITs, IIMs, Ivy league universities or prominent family backgrounds) having more or less the same kind of skills and interests (“standards” is the word used by most recruiters). Consequently there is little emphasis on training and skills up gradation and most of the work that matters is done by the owner, Voldemort, himself. In most promoter driven firms in India, this is the case.



While Deatheater’s Inc works as a centralized business unit to ensure that all decisions are ultimately take by Voldemort, OoP believes in delegation and empowerment. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the last book where Ron and Hermione destroy a horcrux (and so does Neville) when Harry is otherwise expected to do the job. The element of surprise catches Voldemort unawares. The OoP also incubates a smaller organization consisting mostly of students from Hogwarts called Dumbledore’s Army (DA). It is DA that acts as a game changer when push comes to shove towards the end.


In the business world, most companies rely on predicting what their competitors can do and try to make that move first. What they do not prepare for is reacting to any surprises thrown by the competition. A classic example in our business world is of Nokia. While Nokia had the first mover advantage in the mobile handsets market, they did not foresee the advent of cheap smart phones. Today Nokia has barely 31 percent share of the smart phone market. This is a drop from the 40 % it held in 2009. (Source: Nokia smart phone market share shrinks to 31 percent, operating profit takes a beating too, Vlad Savov, January 2011 http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/27/nokia-smartphone-market-share-shrinks-to-31-percent-operating-p/)



When Molly Weasley, a house wife rarely projected as having a taste for violence, disarms and kills the powerful Bellatrix Lestrange, it shows how an empowered individual is more committed than a merely talented one. Another classic example of is the time after Harry’s birth when Voldemort had to go into hiding. Deatheaters Inc totally collapsed and was operating in shadows and was revived only by the resurgence of Lord Voldemort, while OoP remained active and helped protect Harry till he comes of age and helping him defeat Lord Voldemort.


From the marketing perspective, OoP again did a far better job than DI. Their communication was crisp and concise. Their articulation of the vision that OoP saw for the world was simplified and all inclusive. They used Harry Potter as a brand ambassador and this helped them gain followers among the younger witches and wizards. DI on the other hand projected such an image of exclusivity that favoured older wizards and witches of pure blood status who in many ways had lost touch with reality. The inclusion of Muggle born magicians in OoP also helped in extending cooperation with the real world, whereas DI could not take advantage of such an association.



Even when the OoP was on the back foot after the death of Dumbledore they operated through other marketing channels like the underground radio station and ‘The Quibber’. In other words OoP recognized the need that the prospects had to feel safe in a post Dumbledore world and they were able to find channels to articulate this vision.


Finally, it was a coaching nature of the CEO Dumbledore that really helped OoP achieves its aims. Everybody knew their part and was empowered to do their jobs. So long as the final goals were achieved, it did not matter who was responsible for the victories. DI’s vision was to kill Harry Potter. However, Voldemort complicated this vision by ensuring that only he was to kill Harry. This resulted in wastage of time as Harry, though often caught by many death eaters at different times, could still not be killed by them.


An example in the corporate world is the leadership style of JRD Tata, who got the most competent people to run his companies. These managers were empowered to do what was best to fulfill the Tatas’ vision for India.


Many would argue that in the fictional world things are perfect. Good has to triumph over evil. Whereas in the real world, people like Voldemort do succeed. Is that so? No. A look at the history of business around the world will show, how overly centralized companies or those heavily dependent on one person for execution (promoter, CEO) have largely failed (or are failing). Little wonder then that most people prefer to join companies such as Tatas Google, Facebook, 3M, GE, Intel and Asian Paints which have remained on the Top 10 employer listings.

(Also published on silicon India blogs at http://www.siliconindia.com/blogs/blogs_new.php?yCr1l45Owp17tgg3lgMFqbI6TyDqW8yN+2L4x9G6046983519+1++215)


(Dr Vikram is a Marketing consultant. He also blogs at www.doctersoccer.blogspot.com)

(Archana Venkat is a Marketing and Communication specialist as well as a former journalist. She blogs at www.straighttalkwitharch.blogspot.com )