A study about the value of middle management and what happens when it is significantly improved focused on manufacturing in India, but the bottom line, and what is universal, is that good managers and management practices can raise productivity in any situation.
But do highly educated knowledge workers need bosses as much as unskilled factory workers or could they produce the same results on their own?
Let’s make this very personal.
Think about the differences you found when working for a good boss and for a bad one—even if the relativity was more like good/great, bad/worse, or the most common, OK/so-so.
Think about how you felt when the alarm went off; did you look forward to your destination or shrink from it?
During the day did you feel part of a productive team; one that was making a difference and helping the company accomplish its goals or did it feel dysfunctional, untrustworthy, with everyone faking it?
Did you end the work day with a feeling of accomplishment and good mental attitude that you could share with family and friends or did you go home, slam the door and yell at the humans or animals that greeted you?
Trace those feelings back to the management actions and attitudes that fostered them.
Now you know what to do and not do yourself and which to do more of or eliminate.
No question that people need bosses, but what they really need are good to great bosses—and with a little effort you can be one.
Too many managers (of all ages and at all levels) tell me they are using texting, Twitter and email to manage their people. They’re even using them for performance reviews, layoffs and terminations.
When I ask why they use them I’m told some variation of ‘saves time’, ‘more immediate’, ‘modern way to manage’, ‘cool’ or the worst one, ‘lets me focus on what’s important.’
I may be a digital dinosaur, but I’m here to tell them (and you if you are on the receiving end) that that isn’t managing; it’s avoidance pure and simple.
It’s having the title while avoiding every single action required to lead a high-performing organization. It trashes careers and shows enormous disrespect for people.
In short, it’s a total copout; unfair to the team, the company and the investors.
What’s important are the people, because without the people there is no company and if there is no company you have no job.
Companies struggle not only to create great corporate cultures, but to describe them. Perhaps they should read more ads, because off and on I see ads that do a great job of describing various parts of corporate culture.
For instance, in 1998 Sun Microsystems ran an ad that said, “Information shall circulate as freely as office gossip.” A great attitude for any company or manager.
Today I saw another that embodies another great corporate culture action; it was run by IDA Ireland in Business Week.
“New thinking is not about the dollars you invest. It’s about the people you invest in.”
That attitude is even more important today, in a world of shrinking budgets, than it was before tough times hit.
It’s simple; if you want to keep your valuable assets, AKA, the people who keep your company/department/team running smoothly then they need to feel that staying is smarter than leaving.
They need to feel valued even when there’s no money for raises and bonuses.
You do that by investing in them and helping them grow.
And you can do it even when your training budget has been slashed to the bone.
Do you work at fostering a culture of innovation? Encourage your people to think creatively? Do you want them to come up with ideas, large and small, to improve products and processes?
Most managers do.
Do you unintentionally stomp on their creative efforts?
That happens more often than you might think.
How many times has a member of your team (at any level) had an idea or made a suggestion and your initial response was along the lines of, “I know…,” “we tried that already…,” or “Jill already…”
Such reactions dump ice water on the creative process and if it happens several times most people won’t bother mentioning their next idea. Employees understand ideas may not be used, but that’s different from feeling you don’t want to hear about them unless they are perfect.
This happens most frequently with new employees, because they have no history to guide them, but new or not, the result is to kill creativity, instead of nurturing it.
I frequently hear from clients and others about their exciting breakthroughs/ideas for motivating their people, for their culture, or whatever, and it’s often simply their rephrasing of ideas we’ve been discussing or that I, or others, have written about, sometimes for years.
It doesn’t matter; and I make sure not to say anything that detracts from their breakthrough—causing them to feel that it’s not a big deal and that they merely reinvented an old wheel.
You see, the big deal is that they thought of it independently and that’s what I want to encourage—ideas, creative thinking, thinking beyond their knowledge, not necessarily historical knowledge.
To nurture the thinking that leads to creativity you need to acknowledge it, you don’t need to convince them that no one ever thought of it before, they’ll figure that out for themselves or a peer will tell them, what you focus on is the accomplishment.
The critical point is that they came to it on their own, and, because it came from inside, they own it.
And that makes the idea far more potent than anything you or I or anybody can say from the outside.
So when that old idea comes up yet again acknowledge the creativity of the thought first, then gently explain its history, being sure the person understands that the value is in the creativity it took to think of it and that you are looking forward to more creativity in the future.
Pizzled is a cross between puzzled and pissed and it’s what people get when forced to work in a Triple A Culture.
RAT culture, on the other hand, leaves employees engaged, motivated and productive.
RAT means rational, authentic and transparent.
Rational actions that make sense to your people and rational communication that doesn’t employ emotion to manipulate them.
Authentic eliminates BS, yours and all those who report to you, and stays consistent, stabilizing everybody
Transparent is saying clearly what you mean, doing what you say and holding everyone to the same standard—no exceptions.
RAT culture is always a top-down function imposed by any manager at any level on those who report directly or indirectly. Sadly, it is almost impossible to enable or enforce RAT culture up through the organization.
Assuming you have RAT MAP, RAT culture is satisfying to build, because it means
doing what comes naturally;
not having to remember what you said or did to stay consistent, because it was the truth;
creating a working environment that’s full of sunshine instead of sh*t where people can grow and excel; and
where fun, happy, productivity and success are the norm.
Finally, propagating RAT culture is profitable—not just for the company, because of high productivity, and your people, because of goals reached and dreams fulfilled, but for you as you’ll see from your reviews, the ease with which you hire and the pleasure you take in what you’ve accomplished.
So forget pizzled and go RAT, you won’t be disappointed.
I think Harvard’s Jim Heskett poses some of the most thought provoking questions in his “What Do You Think” forum of anyone on the web and his readers generate some of the best commentary.
In his experience, the most profitable companies are run by people who don’t focus on profit.
Almost to a person, they treat profit as a by-product of other things to which they devote most of their attention, things such as a focused strategy that delivers results to carefully-selected customers while pursuing policies and practices that leverage results over costs, hiring people with the right attitude (one that fits with the organization’s culture), and proper training and organization (often in teams).
Heskett cites Obliquity, a new book by British economist John Kay, who argues that business problems cannot be solved by drawing a straight line between cause and long-term effect because they are so complex, a manager’s information so incomplete, the competitive environment so complicated, analytic techniques so inadequate, and the number of things over which a manager has control so limited, that it is impossible to make the connection with any assurance.
Tony Hsieh is adamant about not focusing on profit, but that didn’t stop him from building a billion dollar company.
Take a few minutes and read both Heskett’s thoughts and his readers’ commentary. (The forum is open for comments until July 28.)
Not surprisingly, many of them disagreed and felt that profit is the right focus.
I think that it may have been true in the 20th Century, but it certainly isn’t in the 21st.
A few weeks ago I wrote that money isn’t the best motivator, lots of people have written posts with a similar theme and the idea is backed up by solid research.
But I saw a great video on the subject at Feld Thoughts and thought I’d share it with you.
(I’m not sure which I like more, the presentation or the technology that animates the whiteboard:)
Do you use stories automatically in discussions and conversations? I do and have for years.
Brain research has proven that stories get your point across better and it is remembered longer.
Many cognitive scientists believe stories are so accessible because they’re the way we make sense of the human world. … Stories grab our attention because there is nothing of more interest to us than the actions of other people.
While people are often the bane of managers, their growth, triumphs and ah-ha! moments, small and large, provide much of the joy found in performing a management role well and stories are one way to increase the joy.
Stories increase the joy because they boost management success; simple enough.
How do you know which story to tell?
By taking the time to know your audience and choosing a story that will resonate with them—even if you have to take a little creative license.
For example, if your audience is comprised of mostly twenty-somethings and the main character in your story is sixty-something they may focus on the age and dismiss the important part. So update the story with slight changes that makes it feel more relevant.
Of course, if their eyes glaze over during the telling you can be pretty sure you chose the wrong story. Rather than continue to the bitter end, break it off and come back to the subject from a different point and at a different time.
How do you know if the story worked?
The same way you know if any of your efforts work—watch the results.
Do you run a small or medium business (SMB)? If so, do you have a senior staff?
“Senior staff” doesn’t necessarily mean a bunch of vice presidents (for convenience I’m using that title), but it does mean the top people in your company who manage different functions (with or without staff). They are the people you rely on
as a sounding board;
for both tactical and strategic intelligence;
to tell it like it is—even when you don’t want to hear it
to see and understand the big picture;
to lead the effort in employee acquisition, motivation, and retention;
to support and strengthen the culture she envisioned;
to not sabotage another group or start a turf war, and
to help stamp out politics whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head.
And more, but you get the idea.
How to build your senior staff
The first item on your agenda is to determine what parts of your business/company beyond the standard finance, development, marketing, sales should report directly to you for peak performance. You don’t want a function that is absolutely critical to your success reporting through or responsible to someone else (agendas do get in the way).
It may be customer service (or whatever it’s called); it could be IT; if you are large enough to have someone handling HR it should definitely report directly to you.
Support functions, such as HR, are often left to report to someone else, which can prevent you from knowing what is really going on.
Where does one find talented VPs? Now and then you’ll be lucky enough to actually hire someone complete with all the bells and whistles that you want, but it’s more likely that you will find someone with the right potential.
Be aware that the main thing that separates good senior staff apart from other managers is a strong strategic ability, which means they see the entire team and understand how their department or area fits into the whole.
I’ve known many C-level executives who never grasp this, as well as director level and lower managers who get it.
All your staff needs a real understanding of business, including financials, and it’s your responsibility to make sure that they get whatever training and information is needed to do their job as a member of your senior staff.
Further, if you want the most powerful senior staff possible cross train them in each other’s functions and challenges.
Think of the phenomenal value of a finance person who understands the intricacies of manufacturing as more than a set of numbers; a head of product development who understands financials, customer service and inventory turns; an HR head who understands what actually happens in the different departments, etc.
Think of the power inherent in a senior staff that understands what it takes to turn an idea into a product and a product into revenue.
Think of what a difference it will make to your ability to do your own job, not to mention the overall success of your company.
Sunday I quoted Colin Powell on this subject and it reminded me of this article. I don’t remember where it was originally used, but it dates back to the dot-bomb recession.
It’s “And” Not “Because”
Last week I attended a quasi-social business function and found myself in conversation with a very knowledgeable and polished executive. When I asked him what he did he said, “I’m not working, I’m looking for my next opportunity.” His answer floored me and I asked again. His initial reaction was to repeat himself, assuming that I hadn’t heard him (it was noisy), but my continued look of inquiry finally brought a second answer, “I’m a CFO.”
It’s sad enough that people choose to define themselves based upon how they earn a living, and very bad when, as in the conversation mentioned above, employment becomes the career validation without which the career ceases to exist. However it’s much worse when people take another step and subconsciously merge their identity with that of their company—I call it ego-merge.
I coined the term in the eighties to describe a state of mind that is not only unhealthy for individuals, but also damaging to the companies for which they work.
Ego-merge is the result of melding “me” and “my company” in the mind of the employee, whether worker or manager. It’s most obvious in tough times and most noticeable in conversation when people use “because” instead of “and,” thereby crediting the company or manager for their skills: “I’m great because my company/manager is great.” instead of, “I’m great and my company/manager is great.”
At first glance ego-merge might actually seem to be a positive for companies, but it’s not. When employees’ egos merge with their company’s, they often blame themselves for the company’s problems even when they have little power and may not have any line responsibility. Worse, it can be a major productivity sapper when times are tough—employees with ego-merge have a difficult time believing that they are good enough to help turn the company around, since in their minds their skills are good because of the company.
Ego-merge is often the by-product of the best companies/managers, where people are very involved, have high esprit de corps, and are passionate about their mission and success. It also happens with more Machiavellian managers who try and foster this attitude within their organization as a retention tool. Ego-merge does, in fact, encourage people to stay, but it also cripples them and reduces their long term value to the company.
It’s every company’s/manager’s responsibility to help their people grow and become stronger, not to subtly cripple them in the hopes that they won’t leave. Better, it’s in both the manager’s and the company’s best interest to become people-builders.
Why? Because reputation, both the manager’s and the company’s, is everything when hiring, and being known for your great G&S (grow and strengthen) policies will help you attract, develop and keep the best and brightest. Sure, you’ll lose them now and then when they’re ready for the next challenge and you can’t provide it, but the benefits resulting from their ultra-high productivity and creativeness during the time they’re with you will far outweigh the loss when they do leave.
How? Through some simple actions. G&S isn’t rocket science, nor does it have to be costly.
Treat everyone on your team and in your company with the same level of respect you want.
Listen to your people. Encourage and assist them as much as possible in developing the skills they need to take their next step—even when it makes your life a bit more difficult.
Always remind them that for all their successes, challenges, and failures it’s “and” not “because.”
But what if you’re a manager pushing G&S down while your own manager is either blind to it or the type who sees ego-merge as a plus? What can you do as just a worker with no control or leverage?
Awareness is the best protection against ego-merge. Recognize that it exists, understand what it is, know its symptoms and whether you’re prone to it, then monitor yourself, always remembering that the opposite of ego-merge is not arrogance.
Post a watch for the first symptom of ego-merge: when your glow of accomplishment for an exemplary project you did is quickly quenched by negative internal news or media coverage. The greater the offset the greater the ego-merge.
Listen to yourself. When describing a project (successful or not) or coup (large or small), listen to how you describe it and where and how you attribute its success or failure. Adjust accordingly.
Offset and reduce ego-merge in others by publicly giving full credit to those around you at all levels up and down for their contributions.
Is the picture true? Do people need bosses?
Too many managers (of all ages and at all levels) tell me they are using texting, Twitter and email to manage their people. They’re even using them for performance reviews, layoffs and terminations.
Companies struggle not only to create great corporate cultures, but to describe them. Perhaps they should read more ads, because off and on I see ads that do a great job of describing various parts of corporate culture.
Do you work at fostering a culture of innovation? Encourage your people to think creatively? Do you want them to come up with ideas, large and small, to improve products and processes?
Do you run a small or medium business (SMB)? If so, do you have a senior staff?
Subscribe to MAPping Company Success 