In all my years of reading Wally Bock’s Three Star Leadership Blog I have never come across an iota of unnecessary complication, convoluted advice, negativity, or BS in any form. Just solid common sense and usable how-to’s. Monday you met a good boss and yesterday one of the worst, today is some advice from Wally on how to become a Monday-style boss.

Nobody gets up in the morning and decides they’re going to go into work and be the worst boss on the planet. So, why are there so many bad bosses?

Depending on the research you read, between 1/2 and 2/3 of all bosses are ineffective. Most of them aren’t mean, or abusive, they’re just bad at the job. That research was done a few years ago, but I don’t think things have changed much. It’s the system, silly.

The System Creates Bad Bosses

Bosses are people who are officially responsible for the performance of a group. We expect them to accomplish a mission through the group and care for group members.

Alas, we promote people who give no evidence that they have the skills to do that job or have any desire to do it. You wouldn’t hire someone as an accountant because he or she was a good plumber. But we do that all the time with bosses. We promote people to group responsibility because they’re good at something else. That something else might be making sales, designing marketing campaigns, or writing code. It usually doesn’t include the things we want bosses to do.

You might ask, “Why do people take a position they don’t want and probably won’t be good at?”

That answer’s simple. In too many companies, becoming a boss is the only way that you can get more money and prestige. If it’s the only route available, people will take it.

We could fix this easily. Allow people who might become bosses to try on the job in a temporary assignment. That way the company learns who has the aptitude and desire for a boss’s job. And people learn whether they’ll enjoy the work.

Great. We give bunch of people a job they have no aptitude or desire for. We call it a promotion, but it’s more like a career change. What do we do next?

We compound the problem. Once you become a boss in most companies, you can’t go back to being an individual contributor. You’re stuck. For the rest of your career, you’re going to be miserable doing a bad job that affects the lives and productivity of dozens of people.

Then we compound the problem one more time. We dump people into that new career without much training or support.

Lots of Bosses Don’t Know What Being A Good Boss Looks Like

We build up our mental model of what a good boss is by experiencing a good boss. Too many people who get promoted haven’t had one. They have no idea what it’s like to be a good boss or how different it is to be on a team with a good team leader.

This is a chicken and egg problem. You need good bosses to set the example and help others imagine what being a good boss is like. And you can’t use the negative examples of bad bosses. Bad bosses may teach you what not to do, but they can’t teach you what to do instead.

Good Bosses are Effective Coaches

You want bosses who are coaches, mentors, and encouragers of people who want to do a similar job. That means training bosses in coaching and development skills. It means tying some of their compensation to the work they do developing people. It means basing their promotion, in part, on how effective they are developing good leaders.

The Transition is Critical

We must provide special support during the two years from the time a person is promoted. That means readily available materials, coaching, and coursework.

Deliver training in small bites not a three-day program that covers everything. Deliver training before a person assumes the job, not six months later. By then he or she has developed a bunch of bad habits. Supplement with coaching to transfer skills from the classroom to the workflow.

New bosses will come back from training with a head filled with good ideas about what to do. Then, those ideas slam into reality. Doing is a lot harder than knowing.

That’s when coaching is vital. They need to learn in small, doable steps that build confidence. The best place to get that is from their boss, who’s also a great coach.

Bottom Line

We have a system in most companies designed to produce too many ineffective bosses. We need to fix the system. Meantime pay special attention to coaching. Give potential leaders some experience of the job before they accept it. We can make sure the bosses we have understand new leader development as part of their job and have the skills to do it. We need to remove leaders who aren’t effective, so they don’t continue to affect performance and morale.

Image credit: Three Star Leadership

This recent post from Wally Bock seemed like a great way to wrap up this week’s commentary about values and bosses.

Alan Turing made many contributions to the Allied effort in World War II and to the many fields that have coalesced into computer science. He’s best known among laypeople like me for his “Turing Test,” a test of whether a computer can exhibit intelligent behavior like a human being.

My question for you is: “Could you pass such a test?” If I watched you work for a few hours, would it be obvious that you were a human being and not some kind of AI-powered, cyborg-boss?

In my career I’ve seen too many bosses who couldn’t. They imagined their job as passing on instructions and enforcing regulations. One of their favorite phrases is “I have no choice …”

Most bosses aren’t that way. They may not get everything right, but it’s clear that they’re human beings struggling to do the right thing. That’s probably where you fit, but let’s check. Is it obvious that you’re a real human being or do you act like a walking, talking bunch of algorithms?

Do you take time to have frequent conversations with your team members where you do something more than just pass on directives?

Do you strive to be fair to everyone while you make adjustments for individual strengths, weaknesses, and preferences?

Do you argue for your team or team member when something comes down from above that’s wrong or unfair?

Do you help your team members grow, develop, and succeed?

Boss’s Bottom Line

Human bosses who act intelligently are the best for human beings. That means more than passing on instructions and enforcing rules and standards. Show your humanity by acknowledging the emotion in the workplace and by using both your brain and your heart

Image credit: HikingArtist

When you’re a boss, one of your biggest responsibilities is to help your people grow.

Doing that requires patience, because they won’t all grow at the same rate.

Some people grow fast, like a hare, others are more in the tortoise category, but that doesn’t make them less valuable.

The hares may grow faster, but the growth often lacks substance. Tortoises, on the other hand, are known to dig deep in order to go beyond the knowledge needed to do something and understand the underlying principles.

Speed is important and the lack of depth may not be a problem until something goes wrong. Finding a solution or work-around often requires the deeper understanding that tortoises possess.

The smart boss knows having a balance of both hares and tortoises yields the strongest team; one that can accomplish far more on time and in budget than a team that is predominantly one type or the other.

Image credit: Inspiyr.com

I especially like this post because, in today’s build-your-brand culture, it presents a solid road to success as a boss based on a radical idea: it’s not about you. You are not the be-all and end-all and even if you were it wouldn’t make you a success as a boss. It’s why, in the long run, AI won’t/can’t replace human bosses.

I joined the Marines right out of high school and started in business before I earned my degree. I had a family to support, so going the traditional student route made little sense. I earned my degree while I also worked full-time at responsible jobs. It turned out to be a good thing.

I could take classroom learning and try it on the job right away. It didn’t take long to figure out that an awful lot of the so-called expert advice was nonsense. The people in my economics textbooks, for example, didn’t act like me or any people I knew. Years later, Nobel Laureate Richard Thaler would call them “econs.”

Most of my books and most of my professors treated management as an engineering problem. There was much language about designing an effective system and “well-oiled machines.” There was plenty of advice that involved knowing what buttons to push or what levers to pull.

I learned a lot of good things, but most of the good stuff had nothing to do with working with people. I learned most of that on my own, mostly the hard way. You can have the biggest brain on Planet Earth but working with people requires your heart.

Working with people differs from working with machines. You don’t have to read a book or this blog post to figure this out. Look around you. Think about the people you work with every day.

What are People Like?

We know a lot about people. For starters, we know that we’re all imperfect. We make mistakes. That includes you. Forgive other people when they make a mistake. Admit it when you do.

People have strengths and weaknesses. You want to get the most you can out of those strengths and make those weaknesses irrelevant. People want to make progress. You should help them improve performance and spot opportunities they can seize.

People are emotional. Your computer doesn’t care if you snap at it, but your teammates do. A turret lathe won’t have a fight at home before coming to work. But pretty much everyone I know has had that experience. That’s how it is. Deal with it.

Machines can run all day, every day, for months. Buildings can last for decades with little maintenance. People are different. There’s a limit to how many hours most people can put in before productivity dwindles to almost nothing. For most of us, the top limit is somewhere between 50-55 hours a week. Overwork your people and their productivity will drop like a stone.

People need recovery time, too. After a long day, or after that big push to get a project done, people need to take time off. They need to hang out with their friends, play with their kids, go to a baseball game, or cook and consume a fine meal. Anything that’s not work-related. You interrupt that recovery time at your peril. Do it too often and people get resentful.

People thrive on good relationships. People want to work with other people they enjoy and that they can count on. Many a team has seen productivity decline because two team members couldn’t or wouldn’t get along. It’s your job to manage the work environment.

You’re A People, Too

You’re a person, too. You make mistakes. You have emotions. You have strengths and weaknesses. You want to make progress. Relationships matter a lot. You need breaks and recovery time.

One more thing. You set the example, whether or not you want to. It’s almost impossible to have a team that’s productive and happy if you’re a grumpy slacker. See to yourself first. Revel in your humanity. Draw strength from your relationships. Work hard, but get recovery time, too.

Image courtesy of Three Star Leadership

A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read all If the Shoe Fits posts here.

Most people don’t think of founders as being bosses, including themselves, but, of course, they are.

And as bosses they are responsible for the success of their team, as well as the company.

As well as being a boss, the vision that is the basis of the company originated with them, which frequently leads them to one or more of the behaviors that make them what Wally calls a “bossy boss.”

“Boss” has gotten a bad rap. Many people associate that term with a domineering, order-giving jerk. I think they’re confusing the term “boss” (a person responsible for the performance of a group) with “bossy.”

The Cambridge Dictionary says that: “A bossy person is always telling people what to do.” Great bosses lead productive teams with great morale. Great bosses aren’t bossy at all. They know three important things.

Being Bossy Is Crazy-Making

If you tell everybody what to do, all the time and everywhere, you’re going to wear yourself out. Great bosses know that caring for their people includes helping them develop their skills, abilities, and decision-making. They can’t do that if you’re always telling them what to do. But, if you can stand back and absorb the mistakes that go with learning, people on your team will take a lot of work right off your shoulders.

What’s the alternative? You make yourself crazy trying to do everything and know everything. Morale plummets, and so does productivity.

You Don’t Have Control Anyway

Nobody tells new managers this important truth. When you become responsible for the performance of a group, your power goes down, not up. Oh, sure, you can punish people who don’t do what you want with whatever means your organization will allow.

That’s more like revenge than like power. And, if a team member is willing to absorb the punishment, their behavior simply won’t change. Productivity and morale will plummet.

The only thing you can control is your behavior: what you say and what you do. That doesn’t seem like much, but it’s enough. Use what you say to set clear expectations and to coach, counsel, and encourage. Use what you do to reinforce what you say and set the example.

Edward Deci and Richard Ryan defined “autonomy” as one of the three key drivers of intrinsic motivation. David Burkus reviewed studies of how people respond to increased or decreased control of their life in his great book, Under New Management. He summarized them this way:

“The researchers found a significant correlation between employees’ perceptions of autonomy and their overall performance. In short, the more managers cede control over what to do and how to do it, the more employees do it well.”

People Work Better When They Have Control

Edward Deci and Richard Ryan defined “autonomy” as one of the three key drivers of intrinsic motivation. David Burkus reviewed studies of how people respond to increased or decreased control of their life in his great book, Under New Management. He summarized them this way:

“The researchers found a significant correlation between employees’ perceptions of autonomy and their overall performance. In short, the more managers cede control over what to do and how to do it, the more employees do it well.”

Bottom Line

The best bosses aren’t bossy. They know that being bossy makes them crazy, that they don’t really have control anyway, and that most people work better when they control their work.

Copyright © 2018 Wally Bock, All rights reserved.

Image credit: HikingArtist

Bosses spend inordinate amounts of time, and often money, working on improving their management skills, frequently turning to the latest “thought leader” for insightful new approaches.

But trendy isn’t always good and frequently it isn’t even new.

Rather than spending your time listening to a varying roster of pundits, why not get it straight from the proverbial horse’s mouth. i.e., your workers.

Ask anyone at any level what they love most about their boss and, in one form or another, they’ll say “they listen.”

Ask what they hate and some version of “they don’t listen” usually tops the list.

Listening isn’t rocket science, but it is one of the smartest, most formidable skills you can develop that will also serve you  in a myriad of situations well beyond your role as a boss.

Ironically, it’s not the actual listening that people find so daunting. Rather it’s the pre-listening step that trips so many up.

So, if your goal is to listen, then you must practice its anagram, which is to be silent.
The first is impossible without doing the second.

In other words, your ears turn off when your mouth is running.

As I said earlier, not rocket science.

Image credit: Steve Heath

The last few days we’ve been talking various aspects and effects of respect, but one of the most important to business is its effect on creativity and innovation (they’re not the same thing), although we touched on it when talking about the drawbacks of a “nice” culture.

The opposite of respect is disrespect and if it permeates a culture you can count on four things.

• Less creativity;
• less innovation;
• higher attrition; and
• ‘nice’, homogenized candidates.

From this perspective, “misfits” are valuable to companies. They don’t quite fit into a specific team. They’re always challenging why the company does what it does. They’re rebellious. They’re independent. They can seem counterproductive to everything that a manager needs to achieve—to maintain order.

But those are the people that are going to change the game on how your company innovates.

As a boss, culture is your responsibility. You can’t afford to assume that your boss or their boss will make the right choices.

No matter the scope, within your organization it’s your choice.

Choose wisely.

Image credit: MiloszB

A Friday series exploring Startups and the people who make them go. Read all If the Shoe Fits posts here.

A few years ago I wrote that good bosses need to be part shrink in order to deal with imposter syndrome and real programmer syndrome (for lack of a better term).

Now, there’s a third mental quirk to add to that list; call it high performer expectations syndrome.

Founders have notoriously high expectations of themselves and everyone they hire.

Those expectations are great motivators as long as things are going well.

However, those same high expectations, both external and internal, can have a negative effect on the best people — including the founder.

What we found essentially is this: When the going gets tough, favorites are more likely to quit. […]  When people walk in with high expectations and they begin to falter and experience setbacks, they have two options. They could persist and try to grind it out, or they could take the easier route that might preserve their self-esteem, be less embarrassing, and exit.

Founders and other high-performance team members aren’t likely to quit, although massively hyped stars are another matter.

Most high performance people know they are fallible, so the hit to their self-esteem is more internal and they are less likely to personalize public embarrassment — both attitudes that usually respond positively to “we’re all in this together” team support and coaching.

Stars, however, typically have a strong belief in their infallibility and a high sensitivity to public embarrassment — not a combination that lends itself to team support or coaching.

Good bosses take care of their people and themselves.

They also meld high expectations with a strong culture; one that makes glitches and even failing a learning experience that leads to both company and personal growth.

Image credit: HikingArtist

Yesterday we looked at why a respectful culture is more creative and productive than one where the prime concern is being nice and not offending.

Granted, some things just go together, like peanut butter and jelly, but ‘like’ and ‘respect’ aren’t two of them.

If there is one thing I’ve learned (there are more) over a long life is that you can like a person, but not respect them, and you can respect someone whom you don’t like.

The two attitudes are totally separate and easily stand alone.

For example, recently I came upon new information about a couple I’ve liked and respected for more than two decades. The info made me lose my respect for them, although it did nothing to change the enjoyment I get from their company.

It’s not hypocritical, they are still the same interesting, fun and caring friends, but what I learned made me lose the respect I had for them.

Many people confronted the same situation in the aftermath of the 2017 election.

By the same token, I had a boss for whom I had enormous respect, but avoided spending unnecessary time with — no harassment or inappropriate behavior — I just didn’t like him.

But that didn’t stop me from respecting him and learning all I could, nor did it stop him from promoting me.

Looking back, I think our feelings were probably mutual; I doubt he liked me any more than I liked him, but he listened, recognized my contributions and provided opportunities for me to grow.

I’ve also had bosses, both male and female, who were good folks, great to be around, but I didn’t have much respect for some of the stuff they did.

It’s best when you can both respect and like your boss, teammate, whomever, and vice versa, but if  you have to choose always opt for respect.

It’s worth a lot more in the long run.

Image credit: Matias Garabedian

Yesterday I said we would “consider the difference between respect and nice on culture, creativity, innovation, and success.”

According to the Oxford Dictionary there is a substantial difference between nice and respect:

• Respect: A feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.
• Nice: good-natured; kind.

If one of these was going to be the basis of the culture created, which would you choose?

If you worked in that culture, which would do more to motivate you?

If you chose respect, you hit a home run.

Nice? A grounder to first, with little chance of getting home.

What’s the problem with ‘nice’?

…a powerful quirk in group psychology called shared information bias.

Here’s what happens: in nice organizations, team members become highly attuned to each other’s feelings and short-term well-being. Individuals rightly assume that their survival and advancement is based as much on how nice they can be and how good they make others feel as on the results they produce.

Obviously, if the strongest motivator in your team is not to offend or upset anyone, then creativity will be stifled and innovation crushed.

Recent research and discussions have focused on various forms of bias, both conscious and unconscious. However, it seems to me that information bias often reflects more pernicious biases.

That said, it may also be one of the easier to fight.

Easier, because respect is the antidote and respect is well understood and can be cultivated, since all people crave respect.

Bosses at any level can set the tone simply by respecting everyone on their team equally and not giving a pass to any form of disrespect — no matter who it comes from.

It’s also easier to recognize disrespect and censure it, since it is relatively obvious if you are looking for it.

One of the most common forms of information bias can be found in meetings when the person trying to speak is belittled, cut off or ignored.

It’s up to the boss to stop it, just as it’s up to the boss to model respectful behavior, since most people follow the lead of their bosses — similar to monkey see, monkey do.

Image credit: David Kivlin