Ducks In A Row: Do You Have People Or Persons?
by Miki SaxonDo you work for a company or a manger?
If you ask most people who they work for they’ll name a company, but if you ask them why they love or hate it, stay or leave they’ll usually mention a manager, the people or the culture, which is a projection of the manager and the people.
People quitting is expensive and bad for team morale, but, as Phil pointed out, they can quit and not leave, which, from a management perspective, is the worst thing that can happen.
Think about it, who do you manage? And How?
Adequate managers manage employees.
Good managers manage people.
Great managers manage persons.
Yes, persons. Individuals, because you can’t manage (or lead) everyone the same way.
The same words often mean something different to different people, so you need to say what’s necessary in whatever words will ensure that each individual hears and understands your message.
I’m not saying that it’s easy, but you aren’t paid for easy—you’re paid for results.
And knowing how to manage persons is the best way to ensure that your people won’t quit.
Your comments—priceless
Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL
Image credit: ZedBee|Zoë Power on flickr
May 19th, 2009 at 7:11 am
As the leader/manager of a family I liked this article. It was a great reminder that people don’t leave families, they leave the leaders of that family.
To borrow an idea — Adequate husbands/fathers have a wife and kids, Good husbands/fathers provide for their wife and kids, Great husbands/fathers learn the individual needs of their wife and kids and serve them accordingly.
Thanks for the reminder!
May 19th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Hi Marvin, No problem borrowing the idea, but I differ a bit with your definitions.
If you read Leadership Turn often you’ll know that I’m not a proponent of positional leadership and that includes in families.
Please come back Thursday when I explore this in detail on Leadership’s Future.
Thanks for stopping by and adding your thoughts.
May 19th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Yes, people leave managers, but it gets even worse:
There is a dirty little secret out there:
a large percentage of middle managers are ‘water proof’ and ‘change resistant’. These are the very managers who not only emasculate some dedicated employees who finally give up and end up coming back to the office to ‘just do their jobs’, they also shoo away the very people a company will need to make it to the next level in the game: The BEST & BRIGHTEST of GenY.
These bright minds join an organization, are put under the guidance of a jaded middle manager whose only purpose in life is to hold on to his/her position to pay the bills in time and not to rock the boat (including snuffing out any ‘smart ideas’ this dangerous young start-up may have). After a few weeks/months these young minds have had enough and leave the company for greener pastures.
Immeasurable damage has been done by such managers to talent starved companies who are now running low on fresh brain juice that can ideate the company’s way into the future.
Companies who are not able to filter through their management and realize who and how many ‘blockers’ they have in their ranks will suffer grievously from this double loss:
– loss of current workforce engagement and delivery
– loss of it’s future by flushing out the Best & Brightest minds of GenY who can jolly well choose who to work with and what organizations will win the race for the disruptive future
May 19th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Hi Roger, while I agree with much of what you said, I’d like to add three caveats.
1. I’m not sure I agree with “large percentage.” But more than that, most people perform to the quality of their managers, so much of the fault you are finding with the middle managers should be laid at the door of their bosses.
2. Such managers lose the best and brightest of ANY new hires no matter the generation.
3. I believe that disruptive ideas can come from any level and any generation. That type of thinking is a part of MAP as opposed to being age dependent.
May 19th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Hi Miki,
Yes, the fish does rot from the head and, unsurprisingly, the companies with a large percentage of lagging managers have been brought to this state by their top management.
Of course such managers are losing excellent people of ANY generation, but particularly GenYers who have the flexibility of going on the drop of a hat, taking with them the cutting edge information and culture that will allow a company to face the disruptive changes ahead.
That disruptive ideas come from all levels and ages is true, and at same time we have to be aware that most game changing start-ups are connected with a certain age bracket that is unfettered in their thinking, action and finances.
In short: the bulk of disruptive innovation will by the very nature of the beast come from people who are young enough to question the status quo, to attack existing business models, to replace hierarchies with communities.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Roger, As with any generation, Gen Y is a mixed bag. They remind me of the Boomers when they were young. Gen X was just as disruptive, but there weren’t enough of them to be noticed.
I’m one to look for silver (or at least tin) linings in news and in that way the current economic downturn may be just what the doctor ordered for Gen Y.
Hopefully, the days of requiring instant gratification and constant praise are numbered—for all ages. And Gen Y has finally come face to face something that parental intervention can’t fix.
The management house cleaning needs to start at the top with a positional leader who is smart enough to tie people development to compensation, hiring other execs that agree and then getting the hell out of their way so they can lead and so on down the line—no exceptions.
Will it happen? Probably not where it needs to, but will continue where it is.