Management 11

A very special person is lining up his first management assignment. 

He's been poking at the idea for some time, even tried for an opening in his organization a while ago. Another opportunity has now come along and we've been talking about it: what the current situation is, is he interested, is he ready, what are the implications, etc., etc.

These conversations are wonderful for me because I love sharing what I've learned and the results. I'm a strong believer in the pilot's adage: Learn from the mistakes of others, because you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

So after an ask for help from him to prepare for this new opening, I've been thinking about how best to be helpful. How do I usefully condense 20+ years of management learning and experience? It suddenly occurred to me that I had posted thoughts on management before, and they might be useful. So the list below is an index of management topics from which anyone can pick and choose items of interest.

Management

• Management 1: The prospective manager dilemma
• Management 2: Precision of terms
• Management 3: My manager is a bozo
• Management 4: Some definitions, to have the correct discussion
• Management 5: My manager is my best customer?
• Management 6: Managing my manager!?
• Management 7: Jobs vs. Roles
• Management 8: Fun with role play
• Management 9: Management training?
• Management 10: Coaching and mentoring and asking for help

And just in case you thought you would see more on "leadership" in these, there are lots of posts on Leadership starting with:

• Leadership 1: Leadership can come from anywhere

through to 

• Leadership 13: Smart leadership

(If you want to scan through all the Leadership posts, just look in the Archive list (middle right), select an arrowhead beside a date to find the desired topic. (Google organizes by date instead of topic.))

Now the fun begins! What does he find most interesting? What did I leave out? Do these posts help him get results?
Stand by!

Team Tips – 2 {Where's the Boss?}

Assuming you've read the previous post – Team Tips - 1 – you know the definitions I'm using for “teams”, “boss”, etc. and can guess that I will be relying on the Simple Rules and Tools for Great Teams – the Core Protocols – in my answers.

Indeed, the underlying premise in all these answers is that the team is using the Simple Rules – the Core Commitments in the Core Protocols – and the Tools – the Protocols themselves, for their day to day operation. This is simply the smartest approach for any team that we have found.

So here is the “catch”. If what I am suggesting doesn't seem workable in your situation, then the organization needs to use the Core Commitments and Protocols (or something better).

Let's start with one of the most complicated situations Vickie and I have had to work on with a team, the question Jose R. asked:

“Does the boss belong to the team, or he just must work for it?” (I believe for the last part Jose meant “or does the team just work for the boss?”)

(Remember: “boss” as used here is defined in the prior post Team Tips - 1).

Boss

The simplest rule is NOT to have the boss be part of the team. The team works for the boss, and delivers the product or service the boss requires, in the timeframe the boss requires, with the quality the boss requires. And in large enough organizations the boss is on his or her own team with other bosses of other teams.

Team

In fact the teams working for a boss ARE THE PRODUCTS of the boss, and the teams across the organization are the products of the team of bosses. In the purest arrangement the bosses don't produce any final product or service for sale to their retail customers – their teams do.

And to get even more precise, the boss sets the initial conditions for the team – what must be produced and delivered by the team, and when, and within what constraints (resources, values, legislation, policies, etc.). The most experienced and mature teams can take responsibility for deciding what can be produced and delivered against a given deadline, or alternatively, what deadline they can meet for a given product requirement.

All of this works smoothly when there is a high level of trust and a high level of communication both ways between the team and the boss. And, of course, individual commitment and responsibility from each team member. (We'll explore trust and commitment more in future posts.) These elements are all comprehended and provided for in the Core Protocols.

But the situation gets trickier when the organization is smaller and, for example, the owners of the business are the bosses AND are also contributors to the team and its products.

In this special case the boss or bosses have to operate in two modes: explicitly as the boss, and explicitly as a team member. The modes have to be crystal clear at each moment in each transaction between all parties – that is why I emphasize “explicitly”.

In all cases, the boss's job is to have the team produce a result on time that is great in the opinion of the team and the boss. The boss does not have to be concerned with how that is done, what tools or methods are used, etc. as long as the initial conditions – the non-negotiable items – are met. If the result exceeds expectation or is finished early – fantastic. If there is any doubt that this will happen, the team should be reworking their methods, their focus on deadlines, their quality, etc., without expecting the boss to intervene or rescue them, unless they specifically ask the boss for help.

Similarly, in daily operation, the team relies on the merit of the best ideas from any team member at any time to proceed to producing the team result. The boss as a team member cannot have any special standing or influence, otherwise the other team members will eventually stand back and wait for the boss to propose all ideas and make all the decisions, and the huge opportunity for individual leadership, innovation, and energy is lost.

Accordingly, as the boss the business owner states the end result required or the deadline, then steps aside to let the team get on with it. As a team member, the owner acts as an equal with all the other team members to determine how best to produce a high quality result, or when the result will be completed as appropriate.

To be crystal clear about what mode the business owner is in – boss or team member – he or she may use a special name, put on a particular hat, etc. or simply say: “As the boss I need...” or “As a team member I propose...”

Needless to say, this special case can add a layer of extra effort and confusion, and so we recommend the simplest scenario for teams that are just getting accustomed to using the Core Protocols for team building and operation. But if there is no choice, we have a number of ways of accomplishing the special case.

If you already are knowledgeable about the Simple Rules and Tools of Great Teams – the Core Protocols – then you can see how this boss / team model works.

If not, then you will probably have many more questions on how this model can possibly work! So please send in your questions via the comments section below or @ReevesResults on Twitter.

Management 10

Q: Hey, I had a look at adaptivecoach.wordpress.com to see what I could find on Business Coaching. I didn't realize that coaching was such a big thing.

A: How do you mean?

Q: Well there are certification bodies, and many specialties for coaches, and just a lot going on in that world, all over the world.

A: That's right. There's lots of help available once you start to look for it. And asking for help doesn't mean one is not smart or capable – actually the opposite. The most successful folks are those who have gotten help: hired competent people to support them, taken training, engaged coaches and consultants whenever needed.

Q: OK; but we didn't talk about cost. Aren't coaches and consultants expensive?

A: Not nearly as much as lawyers and plumbers! :)
But seriously, expensive consultants may get the financial press, but like everything else, one gets what one pays for. For example some of the most expensive coaches and consultants only take payment when the client declares the coaching to be successful.
And in general, while an hourly or daily rate might appear high, that has to cover all the learning, preparation, certification, business operations, etc. time that is not on the bill. So if it took 8 hours to prepare and deliver a 1 hour session, the achieved income is at the rate of 1/9 of what is billed. Believe me, it would be so deliciously wonderful, if consultants earned their published rate throughout a whole week or month.

Q: That sounded pretty personal. :)

A: OK – got me.
Unfortunately, the perceived high cost versus return is often a factor in the “easy”, but dumb, budget cuts that we talked about last time. The good news is that people who have been smart enough to use a coach or consultant – and some can provide both services – know the return is worth it. There are many studies that show results like:
"PWC Global Survey of Coaching Clients Reveals Median 7X ROI

• 86 percent of companies that use or have used coaching report at least a 100 percent return on their initial investment

• 82.7 percent, of individuals who have experienced professional coaching report being "very satisfied".

Q: Neat! Those are great stats.
What other ways are there for me to learn to become a good manager?

A: One is finding a good mentor in your own organization. This is kind of like having an assistant coach to whom you can turn for questions and advice who is close by and knows the organization well and the players involved.

Q: It's interesting that you used the term “assistant coach” - why?

A: Because a professional coach is well trained, certified by an independent body, follows a particular approach or model that has been proven to be successful over time.
A mentor is more like a good friend. They may be wise, insightful, friendly, have the best intentions, but there is no assurance of a professional approach. They are making it up as they go along.

Q: OK – so it's back to “you get what you pay for”?

A: Exactly. Having a good mentor is very helpful, if only as a sounding board for your concerns, ideas, issues.
If you are feeling sick, your grandmother can provide some really good chicken soup which picks you right up, or you can go to your doctor for a more complete, systematic check up. Both have their place, both can get results, one is just more thorough with an assurance of longer term benefit.

Q: So, if I'm trying to become a good manager, what do you recommend?

A: Pay attention to all of these aspects – research & training, clarity of your role and expectations, practice, and asking for help.
We've covered the principles of managing – the key elements, the need to be clear with your manager what he or she is asking of you, the benefit of practicing the elements and learning from your mistakes, and the importance of asking your own manager for help on how you are doing, and help in improving through mentoring, or a coach.

Q: And are there some essentials that are not to be missed?

A: Understanding yourself and your own values, and being open and curious. Connecting, communicating continuously, including asking for help allows you to be investigative and adaptive, and to be understood.
Managing is a people activity, and so requires connecting well with people – understanding and being understood. The foundation is fundamentally good two way communications, starting with good listening – truly hearing the other person.
Management decisions directly affect the people being managed, so it is critical to know and appreciate how they are going to be affected, and that comes from understanding them and their perspective.
Asking for help enables those conversations, builds those connections and relationships, that provides you that knowledge.

Q: So is there a way I can work on connecting and asking for help?

A: Absolutely! Check out the Core Protocols at www.businessimprovementresults.com/whatresults.html, and attend a BootCamp to build your skills.

Management 9

Q: So you always manage to divert from my question to make your own point, or to ask me a question in reply.

A: And what's wrong with that? :)

Q: Stop kidding around! The question on the table is “How does a Manager get to know about all the management stuff we have talked about”?
By the way – where have you been?

A: Now who's digressing? But thanks for asking. I've been taking a little R&R with my sweetie and recovering from a strained back – this property management stuff is hard on a desk jockey.
Back to your question:
The fact that you have to ask is an example of an issue we see regularly. Management Training just doesn't seem to be a standard item in organizations any more.

Q: For sure! I think our budget for all training has been cut back considerably over the years.

A: I'm afraid so. Things like training, coaching, consulting regularly get cut back in, or out of, budgets whenever spending is constrained. Unfortunately, there is always someone with a sharp pencil, or spreadsheet, that can make a name for themselves by finding short term savings.

Q: Yeah; but the argument always is that we need to focus on our core business, our “core competencies”, and these extras get cut.

A: Well; that's just one more aspect of short term thinking. Training, coaching, and consulting build core competencies and provide efficiencies and effectiveness to make the business more profitable. Cutting these things out once saves money – once, in this budget. That's just poor planning, staffing, and controlling.

Q: Hey! I remember those items – they're part of the management activities list. So you are saying those cuts are poor management?

A: They are unless all other options for immediate cost savings have been exhausted, like capturing the salary of the one-time-savings hero.
It really comes down to how do Managers make these decisions. And typically cutting training, coaching, consulting look like good decisions because the longer term isn't considered, or the return on investing in these items isn't known or seems to be too hard to figure out.

Q: Are you on your soapbox again?

A: Probably; but it is relevant. How does an organization prepare and develop for the future without training, coaching, and consulting? If the machinery isn't oiled today, it won't run tomorrow.
Managers get to know the fundamentals of their jobs through being taught, and then doing. The path to lots of good decisions is littered with lots of bad. Remember that the goal to start with is simply make more good ones than the others.

Q: I'm hearing that training is the start, and the doing part – including making mistakes – is next.

A: Right, just like most things. Management can be taught; good management takes practice; really good management requires great people skills that not everyone has.
So once the initial training is done, and mistakes are being made, then coaching can make a huge difference in tuning skills and adapting from lessons learned.

Q: OK; training is clear, but I'm not familiar with this “coaching” idea. You mean like a sports team coach?

A: Perhaps a better analogy is a personal fitness trainer. Only a business coach is your personal business skills trainer. And, of course, one of the business skills is management.

Q: Neat; so a coach works with you on a regular basis?

A: As often as you wish, usually on a weekly or bi-monthly basis. That way issues that the coach can help with are current, the mistakes made and lessons learned are fresh, and an effective flow is maintained for progress. The best are certified as coaches, have solid personal experience and background in the area, and so can be extremely valuable and focused on their client – you! :)

Q: And what do I get out of this?

A: Well, anything you wish. Imagine that any time you had a question about your management role, situations with employees, tough decisions, the “office politics” stuff, etc. you could reach an expert with suggestions, approaches, reminders, etc.

Q: Sounds like a real time management support life line!

A: Yeah! Cool, eh?
Why don't you, for next time, do a little research on Business Coaching. A great place to start is adaptivecoach.wordpress.com

Q: Jeez; homework again?

A: Yup. :)

Management 8

Q: So how are we going to ask my manager what he means when he asks me to “lead the group”?

A: Why don't we do a little role play?

Q: Jeez, here you go again with the roles thing. Is this going to hurt?

A: Only if you don't want to play your Manager.

Q: Do I get his salary too?
But really, how do I know what he's thinking? Not knowing that is what got us here.

A: Sure; but we can try some different possibilities and see how things work out. You be him, and I'll be you. Here we go:
Hey, thanks for asking me to “lead the group”! I'm always up for a new challenge and appreciate your faith in me.

Q: Whoa! That's already too much sucking up – let's get serious. I would never say that!

A: Hmmm; too bad. If you don't show some sort of appreciation then you shouldn't expect to be asked again. And if you really don't want the challenge then you should say so right away.
Anyway, my next question (as you) to you (as your manager) is:
What exactly would you like me to do to lead the group?

Q: But this is the problem with this playing roles thing: I don't know what he – er, me – wants.

A: You are having a bad day, aren't you. Will you imagine what he might say? There's lots of choices – just start with one.

Q: OK.
I want you to take charge of the group to get this project completed on time. And under budget. And make me look good, too.

A: Good one! Now you're in the spirit of this. And then I say:
Completed on time, under budget – anything else?

Q: Er... not right now. I'll probably dream up some other stuff in a while.

A: OK. Is this a formal appointment, that is a change in job?

Q: Uh... No, I'd like you to try it out, see how you do, see if you've got the right stuff, show us what you've got, carry the ball down the field and make the big slapshot, go for gold!

A: (Easy tiger, don't get crazy on me.)
Alright. What are my boundaries? For example, am I supervising the work, or managing the group?

Q: How about you manage the group?

A: Got it; that means to me that I will be doing your functions of

• planning
• organizing
• staffing
• directing, and
• controlling

for the people in my workgroup. Do you agree on that?

Q: (Ooooh. You just pulled the Manager's essentials out – cute. Now I see why those are good to know. So how do I play that shot?)

A: (Great observation – that is why they are good to know! And for your reply, imagine what your manager would say)

Q: Ah, well... er... not staffing. You can't hire or fire people because we're just trying this out.

A: OK. So if the project needs more people to be done on time, I need to come to you for your help on that?

Q: Uh... sure (I think) (This making manager's decisions is getting tricky – what if I mess up?)

A: (Yeah, interesting isn't it? If it makes you feel better it's OK to be wrong. Your boss will usually be happy if you at least get things right more often than you are wrong. Actually, the most important question is what you do when you are wrong.
For our role play you can be as right or as wrong as you like. We can always rewind and try again.)

Q: (Good! This is kinda neat being able to see things from the other side. I guess all that management office politics I complained about before was out of line.
Let's keep going.)

A: So far I understand you want me to manage the group but without authority for staffing. That means I am accountable for planning, organizing, directing, and controlling – right?

Q: Sounds fine.

A: OK. Then I can re-plan the project? Re-organize people's assignments? Direct their daily work tasks? Measure their results to control their productivity and quality?

Q: Uncle! Stop. Can I be someone else now? I don't know how to answer all those questions. How does my manager know?

A: Fine – we can stop. I think you got a sense of how this might play out.
The key is knowing the definitions – the essential elements – of the manager's job and recognizing that words like “leading”, “supervising”, “directing” need explanation.
The best thing one can do is ask: “What exactly do you mean when you say...”, and to not make assumptions. That's why we have spent so much time on the words and the details – there's just too much at stake for confusion.

Q: Yeah, and you really nailed me with your questions. I was feeling really pinned down.

A: Exactly. When you have thought about the essentials, and you have a list handy, then you are better able to ask the strong questions that clarify the requirements and the boundaries.
It's often most helpful to ask what is not included – what are the exceptions. For example, the staffing element in our role play.

Q: OK. I know you are a big fan of Ask for Help, and I can see why. And why you like to be clear on the words used.
But you didn't answer the question about how does a manager get to know this stuff?

A: Right. :)

Management 7

Q: So we were talking about things that were part of job descriptions – the essentials – and then you added this “roles” thing. Why do you keep making this complicated?

A: Well, it's actually simpler when you can keep the bits and pieces clear.
It's important to know what the minimum requirements of a job are – the outcomes of that position for which one is hired and paid. But we all quickly realize that there is much more to a job than that. We end up doing all kinds of things that weren't covered in the hiring interview or the position description.

Q: Ha! Tell me about it. And so?

A: Well, we need to meet our job description requirements to get paid. And we need to fulfill many roles to get the job done and be successful. Some seem to naturally be part of the job and others are opportunities to try something new, based on our manager's requests or our own initiative. We often talk about wearing a variety of different hats.
The job description requirements are normally word-smithed to be clear and exact; the roles are much more informal and based on tribal knowledge and experience.
For example: from a job description perspective, “directing” is more precise than “leading” for a management job. Leaders (as a job) determine which forest to manage, Managers direct their staff to which trees need to be harvested.

Q: That seems to be a scope or big picture vs. smaller picture question.

A: Exactly.
And also, as our teamwork sessions keep showing, leadership is not restricted to a particular job and can be done by anyone. So while Leaders need to demonstrate leadership regularly, as part of their job, anyone can, and should, demonstrate leadership when they have the best idea.

Q: Well at least we're getting back to the leadership question. But why are you concerned about job descriptions vs. roles?

A: The job description concept is simply a way to describe the essentials required in a job – the minimum set of activities for a given role. Our summary for a Manager is:

• planning
• organizing
• staffing
• directing, and
• controlling

These are the things that a Manager must do at the very least (their job description). These aren't in your job description, and they aren't differentiators in a Leaders job description.

Q: But surely some, or all, of these activities are done by the Leaders – the senior management or whoever you mean.

A: Yes they do in their role as Managers of others. It's when we don't recognize the roles people are playing – which hat they have on – that we get these things muddled up.
That is why it is best to think of the role each person is playing at a given moment to recognize what activities they should be doing to fulfill that role well.

Q: And roles are different than jobs?

A: For sure. Your job is a description of what you are hired to do – the results expected – and the skills and knowledge required to get the results. To get that job done you may play many roles including manager executing management activities (even with your manager), and leading when you have the best idea in your team or workgroup.
One way to look at it is:

• you have to do your job to get paid;
• the various roles you can play to do your job - get it done faster, smarter, with higher quality, with more value, etc. - make you a more valuable employee.

Q: So if I am just fulfilling my job requirements, that's my job, and if I need to exercise some management skills with my peers or my manager then at that moment I am acting in the role of a manager?

A: Sure. For small work transactions you may just describe it as exercising some management skills or activities, but for more extended time periods – for example, when your manager is away on vacation – you would say you are filling that role on their behalf.

Q: Got it; but again why are we fussing with all this definitions and categorization stuff?

A: Because, in my opinion, based on how people write about this and discuss it, we easily get messed up and off track. We think we understand and then realize it was all about something else.
For example: when the manager of a group asks you to “lead the group” what does that really mean?
Often it is assumed to mean “be in charge”, “provide direction”, “organize the work”, etc.

Q: Yeah; that seems OK to me.

A: So now you are being asked to “lead the group”, is that a new job? Are you now the group's Supervisor? Team Lead? Manager?. In other words is that a job assignment or a role?
And what responsibility, accountability, authority do you have?

Q: I don't know; I just get to come in late and put my feet up! Just kidding.
More likely I get to deal with all the problems.

A: Right. You would usually end up with more questions in your mind than answers. And not about the work itself, but about the people stuff. What are your boundaries? How directive can you be? What do you do to lead?

Q: Hey; didn't we agree already that anyone on the team should be able to lead when they have the best idea?

A: Yes!
So what does your manager want when he tells you to “lead the group”?

Q: Beats me.

A: Me too! When we get together again let's ask him. :)

Management 6

Q: Hey there; where have you been?

A: Hi. I was away doing a little informal family management – the “herding cats” and “leading from behind” stuff

Q: Hmmm. I'm afraid to ask.
Anyway, I did my homework and looked up the golden rule in “The One Minute Manager”*. Pretty cute.

A: And it said?

Q: The one with the gold makes all the rules.

A: Right. And that's also part of why your boss is your best customer.

Q: Alright – I've been waiting to get back to this one! What the heck do you mean?
How does my boss also get to be my customer? He doesn't buy any product that our company produces.

A: Well that is only one way to define “customer”.
A more generic way is to see everything we do as a chain of activities. I do something for you, you add work or value to it and pass it on. At each step, each person is, momentarily at least, the supplier and the next person in the chain is their customer.
You and I have the discussion in this blog (suppliers) and someone reads it (customer), then they tell a friend (now they switch to being a supplier) and the friend is their customer. And so on.

Q: Do you mean that in all the work I do I am the supplier to my manager?

A: Overall, yes. Another way to see it is to ask: Who cares about the quality of your work?

Q: Well, I guess that would be my manager. And also the next person in the production chain according to your description before.

A: Exactly. So if you want to get paid (golden rule) you would want to follow your manager's rules, and if you want to continue to get paid you would treat your boss as your best customer.

Q: So what does that really mean – a lot of sucking up?

A: Well, imagine yourself as a one person retail operation. Your manager comes into your store now and then and you want to maximize your revenue from him to stay in business. Sucking up probably wouldn't be productive, but paying attention to what he wants, understanding his requirements, suggesting good ideas, providing the items that meet his requirements, providing better quality and value than he expects, and so on would help.
When you are the customer, what does it take to have you come back and buy more?

Q: OK, fine. But sometimes he doesn't really know what he wants, or his expectations are way out of line.

A: Then you have to help him, just like you would in your store. You have to manage him.

Q: Whoa! Stop! Now you have me managing my manager?

A: In a way. You can at least guide, provide information, teach where necessary.
Let's step back and review management activities that we talked about before, and see if there are ones you can exercise with your manager. These were:

• hiring, supervising, measuring, and maintaining or promoting or firing

A more comprehensive list from Wikipedia** is:

• "planning, organizing, leading, co-ordinating, controlling, staffing, motivating

[And these come together as:]

• Management comprises planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization (a group of one or more people or entities) or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal."

Q: It seems that there is a lot of different items – isn't there just one good list?

A: Unfortunately no. There's lots of variance of opinion between “experts”; however, some of it is wording. For example: staffing covers hiring, promoting, and firing; controlling covers co-ordinating, supervising, measuring, and maintaining; again, all depending on the level of precision you need.
But there are some areas where some interesting shifts in perspective have occurred lately.

Q: Such as?

A: Notice in the last “definition” the wording is “leading or directing”.
Leadership has become such an enigma and area of research lately that people, myself included, like to reserve “leading” as a special word.

Q: But isn't that just splitting hairs?

A: I agree it can seem like that. But if you remember our previous discussion about precision, then the implications of the word used become important.
For example: does a Manager lead or direct?

Q: Well, if there really is a difference, shouldn't they do both?

A: Yes! But perhaps not for the reasons you expect.
In a job requirements sense – the job description if you will – managers have to direct their employees. That's required. But everyone should lead when they have the opportunity.
If you are the Leader, however, you should always be ready and capable of leading. That's a Leader's job requirement.
It might be easier if we separate job requirements/job descriptions from the roles each of us play.

Q: I knew you could complicate this further! Can we have a break and get into this "roles" idea later?

A: Sure. :)

* Kenneth H. Blanchard, Morrow, 1982
** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Management

Management 4

Q: As I recall, you were suggesting that we need to start at the beginning of the story?

A: That's right. If we are going to discuss “Management” we need to know what we are actually talking about.

Q: I feel some definitions coming at me.

A: Right. Let's see what some sources have to say.

Q: Is this going to take long?

A: That depends on you. :)
Here's the first one: Among Webster's offerings for Management: “the judicious use of means to accomplish an end” (1).
And for Manager: “to handle or direct with a degree of skill” (2)
and “to exercise executive, administrative, and supervisory direction” (3).

Q: So?

A: Well, for starters, your bozo Manager in our previous discussions seems to have fulfilled definition (1) - “the judicious use of means to accomplish an end”. Whether you perceive his contribution or not, he used the means – you – to accomplish an end – you produced your results.

Q: But he didn't contribute – he didn't help me at all.

A: Agreed, but he didn't need to did he? In effect he used definition (2) - “to handle or direct with a degree of skill”, with you as a capable employee. That is he handled you with skill by staying out of your way and letting you produce.

Q: But he didn't lead at all, and spent his time playing office politics.

A: OK. Will you give me an example of his “office politics”?

Q: Sure; he was constantly in meetings with the other managers negotiating priorities, and tasks, and who was going to do what, and generally sucking up.

A: Good; that sounds a lot like definition (3) - “to exercise executive, administrative, and supervisory direction”. “Executive” direction is about executing – getting tasks done. That requires working out and understanding priorities, and who is going to be involved. “Supervisory” direction is about arranging to have those “who”s – like you - actually do the tasks.
I do agree that “generally sucking up” isn't in the dictionary definition. :)

Q: So you are telling me that according to the definitions my Manager was actually doing his job?

A: Yup.

Q: But that just can't be right. Where's the leadership? Where's the getting involved and helping get the tasks done? I didn't see him contribute at all!

A: Right.
Based on your criteria he did a damn fine job – as a Manager. The definitions so far haven't mentioned leadership, or getting involved in your tasks.
And let's be clear about the record for your scenario. You said “I knew my job, I knew my objectives, I knew my boundaries, I knew how to get things done and I did them.” How did you know your job?

Q: Well, I was hired with the knowledge and skills I needed.

A: And who hired you, and checked that you had the knowledge and skills?

Q: My Manager and the Human Resources assistant with the skill tests and new hire paperwork.

A: And how did you know your objectives, and boundaries?

Q: They were part of the job description and my performance objectives documents.

A: Good! Definitely a better start than I've seen in a lot of companies.
How did you know “how to get things done”?

Q: I figured out who the important people were who knew the operation and the inside tips.

A: Excellent! Did anyone help make sure you got your job description, performance objectives, introduced you to key people with experience?

Q: OK, OK. Don't rub it in; my Manager set things up for me. But then I was on my own!

A: And it worked out fine from what you said before.

Q: But surely there's more to managing than what I saw him do for me.

A: Yup. There's lots, but before we get to that let me ask you something. How do you feel about your Manager now?

Q: Well I'm not about to give him a big hug if that's what you mean.

A: That's fine. There's probably some Human Resources policy about that. :)
Besides you don't even have to like him – just respect him by believing he is a smart, rational human being like you until you have solid data to the contrary. After all he is your best customer.

Q: Whoa! You might have wrangled me into accepting he's not as big a bozo as I thought, and in fact, according to you, did the right things for me. But my “best customer”? Now you are talking like the bozo. How can my boss be my customer?

A: Let's find out next week. :)

Management 3

Q: OK, let's try this again.

A: Good. Glad you are back - suggesting a break was a super idea.

Q: Yeah; better than punching you in the nose. So, we were talking about working for a bozo.

A: Yes; however “bozo” is somewhat imprecise and loaded term. Is it alright that we describe him as appearing to be incompetent because you didn't see the behaviour you wanted to see?

Q: Sure. I know you know what I mean, but your insistence on wording must have a reason so I'll play.

A: Good, because I chose my words carefully. I picked “appearing”, “incompetent”, “behaviour”, and “you”. First of all, I do sincerely appreciate that your boss in your example did appear to be incompetent to you. We've all experienced someone doing something that looked strange, unreasonable, unproductive right through to downright ugly.

Now in this scenario, You are seeing Behaviour that Appears Incompetent. To sort this out it would be ideal to know if it is only You (or everyone?), that sees Behaviour (consistently based on values and intent?) that Appears (or truly is according to the organization?) Incompetent (or just unexpected or unacceptable to you?).

Q: Jeez, you are picky. But I do get the point – there are a lot of variables at play.

A: Exactly, and you can see that we have just identified a few. Let's agree that a reasonable employee, such as yourself, thinks your manager is useless (another very precise term. :) )

If we look at those situations, in an organization, logically and objectively we can determine that a) this manager's boss is blind or unresponsive to this person's apparent incompetent behaviour, or that b) the manager's boss believes, or at some time believed, this person to be worth keeping in the company's employ.
Another possibility is that the boss herself is having a moment of temporary insanity, or has just used up her competence quota; however, either of these can still be covered in a) or b).

Q: Great, so both my manager and his boss are bozos?

A: Yes! - OR - our perception of the situation isn't accurate. Objectively we would both have to agree that it is probably the latter. We may not like what we see but the manager's boss must be OK with things, or if she isn't then hopefully is working to rectify the situation.
Either way, let's be careful we aren't making some bad assumptions. And even if we are correct temporarily, or permanently, let's get some facts before judging.

Q: Fine, I get your point – I shouldn't jump to concussions. So let's talk about the scenario where all my peers agree; that is it's not just my opinion.

A: Good. Do we have facts from anyone out there or is this still a group opinion? And before we argue over what's a fact and what isn't, let's just consider this. If your manager is a problem (we haven't uncovered what this problem is yet) it is his manager who has to get the facts, determine what the problem is and solve it. Ideally, that manager will do a great job and ask for your input.
But that won't be happening if your manager's boss is getting what she wants, no matter what you and I think about the situation.

Q: So we are stuck – that's just dandy!

A: Well, yes we are stuck, but not the way you think. We are stuck with common misconceptions about what “Management” is, and how it works, and where we fit in as employees.

Q: Ouch. That says that my opinion of my bozo boss is a misconception?

A: Not your opinion – that is what it is – but the cause of your opinion. Until we've been a “Manager”, or studied “Management” from those who have, it's really easy to misunderstand. It's just like every other skill or profession: if we aren't a trained pilot we don't know how to fly the plane. We can criticize a bumpy flight, but we can't be certain we could do better.

Q: This sounds like a “walk in the other person's shoes” moral.

A: Exactly.

Q: So how do we get past that obstacle?

A: Well one way is to start at the beginning of the story and see how we got to situations like you've experienced. Let's do that next week.

Management 2

Q: So here we are again talking about “Management”, and you owe us an explanation about your use of quotation marks around such terms from last week.

A: You're right. My intent was to indicate a general use of the terms, covering a wide spectrum of meanings, until we have a chance in this discussion to be more precise.

Q: What's this concern with being precise?

A: It's more like an obsession about communication. Clear communication is tough enough when we speak the same language and have similar interests. It's even more challenging when we aren't careful about our choice of words and that leads to mis-understanding. So my goal is to be as precise as I can about words, critical ones at least, that are important to the point. Let's call them key words.

Q: And there isn't enough precision?

A: Generally no. For example: we talk about leading a group of people, supervising a group, managing a group, etc. often interchangeably. That's OK when it doesn't change the point of the message – the understanding. It's fine when we are being general and don't need to make a distinction.
But it hinders us when we are trying to be clear about differences, getting at specifics, or looking for improvement opportunities. In these instances, the words are important otherwise our resulting learning and actions are inappropriate, and we end up with a mess.

Q: Alright; I guess I am OK with that. Now, can we get on with it?

A: You're asking the questions. :)

Q: Fine. Let's jump into the deep end. We've all worked for “Managers” who seemed to be bozos who couldn't lead their way out of a paper bag and spent all their time playing office politics. What's that all about? What use are they?

A: Well, first of all, thanks for using quotation marks to make your question general and applicable to a large number of situations. Nevertheless, I am going to ask you for more precision: What is your problem with that situation?

Q: You can't be serious! Clearly that's a problem – they are incompetent.

A: Perhaps they are, but we don't have that data yet. Let me ask you a question: As someone working for that kind of Manager how did you do?

Q: Well, I was fine. I mean: I knew my job, I knew my objectives, I knew my boundaries, I knew how to get things done and I did them. But what if I was a new employee or new to the group, then what?

A: OK; then as far as you getting the right results there wasn't a problem, right? So, if I were to judge your Manager on that basis I would say he did the job required; i.e. your Manager had you produce the right results.

Q: Come on! The guy was a bozo and had nothing to do with me getting the results I did – I did everything for myself.

A: Then it sounds like you were the ideal employee and your Manager let you get on with being successful. And so the problem is...?

Q: OK. So, first you try to flatter me, and then you ignore the other part to my question, and now you are trying to make me look silly.

A: And perhaps you are getting just a tiny bit emotional. That's good; humans are supposed to be emotional even at work. If I may, I want to talk more about the data here first, and deal with the emotion later.

Q: No way! Now you are being condescending and I'm getting angry. And being emotional at work is unprofessional and unproductive, everyone knows that!!

A: Alright. I understand that you feel like I was trying to flatter you, and I sounded condescending. I did indeed bypass part of your concern relating to new employees. I'm sorry my approach is annoying you.
I absolutely agree that it is commonly accepted that emotions in the workplace are unprofessional. Would it be alright if I explained myself a little before we continue?

Q: Hmmm... I think I need a break.

A: We can do that; and reconvene next week?

Q: OK.

Management 1

First of all:
My thanks go out to Luke Schubert of Adelaide, Southern Australia for commenting on this blog with his examples of great leadership. If you have been paying attention to international news you know that Australia has been going through an extensive drought, leading to huge wildfires. It's been hotter than, well... Australia... in the summer time - which is 40+ Celsius right now.
Luke and his family, including two youngsters, haven't been able to sleep properly in the heat. Nevertheless, he has been making time to participate in the on-line BootCamp / ResultsCamp that is underway, doing his regular day job, his dad stuff, and passed on his examples in the Comments to last week's blog. Thanks Luke – Beauty mate!

My intent is to collect such stories and add them to the leadership articles in the near future.

Second:
I was alerted last week via Twitter (www.twitter.com/reevesresults) of a blog by “RandsinRepose” (www.randsinrepose.com) on management (“A Disclosure”). Specifically it is about the situation of successful “specialist” being asked to lead his team and become their manager. It was very interesting reading about the dilemmas, anomalies, and other upsets in the work life of a new “manager”. (The quotation marks will be explained in a moment.)

And that got my sweetheart Vickie and I into another great discussion, this time about “Management”.

Since she is a business coach (www.adaptivecoach.com), as well as my consulting and training partner, and focuses on the Generation Y (also known as Millennials) cohort moving into management assignments, and has her own experiences dealing with Boomer Generation managers, we just had the best time exploring the whole “management” thing.

Once we had solved world hunger in that discussion, we agreed that it seemed that the “Great Forgetting”, that Daniel Quinn describes in “Ishmael” and his other books on the nature of our Taker culture, has happened with respect to the general understanding, or the lack of understanding, on “Management”. It appears that the basics of “Management” aren't taught, heard, or absorbed in organizations these days, and in our consulting lives, Vickie and I run into examples of this regularly.

Further; the distinctions between leadership and management are unclear, so why not jump into the “Management” water as well as talk about leadership in this blog?

So at the risk of sounding like the Four Yorkshiremen “dreamin' of living in a corridor” (luxury!) who believe the youngsters these days don't appreciate how good they have it, I thought some fun with “Management” might be in order. (Thanks Monty Python)

Question: So, Mr. Reeves, I take it that you feel there is a gap in understanding in what “Management” is all about?

Answer: Very perceptive! I keep running into confusion, mis-understanding, and general belly-aching about it.

Q: And you are just the Saviour to lead us all out of this wilderness?

A: Of course.

Q: How modest!

A: Think nothing of it. Just show up again next week after I have compiled my extensive knowledge and experience into a few thousand pages of notes.

Q: Wait a second – you haven't explained your use of quotation marks above around “manager and “Management”.

A: You're right.