Changing the Managing Landscape

Let us do the best we can!!!

Firstly let me wish you all the best for 2010 and that it is a year that brings you all that you desire.

Having had the privilege of working with many people in both private and public organisations I have first hand experience of the amazing level of capability that existed. However, initially it was a mystery that the results these talented people produced was at best average and at worst mediocre. I know that we are all different to some degree and this also applies to our capability. Yet the general level of capability of the people I interacted with was nearly always more than enough to achieve the outcomes expected from their role. I set out to discover the reasons and found that in most instances it focused on the inadequacy of the organisational structure to encourage the best results from their people. It was also obvious that the talent pool was present at all levels in organisations therefore my mission became one of seeking better way of developing people to provide them with the ability to more effectively use their talents.

You will have noted in my earlier posts that I was critical of the disempowering effect that many hierarchical organisations have on their people in general with a few exceptions. This stimulated me to explore different models that have been tried elsewhere and from this experience to draw out the elements that would provide a working environment that truly enabled everyone in an organisation to give of their best. Before describing this environment I think it would be useful to reflect on the present situation in many organisations to make my case for the changes I suggest later on in this blog.

Why the need for a different landscape

From conversations that I have had with people who operate at different levels in both private and public organisations a consistent theme emerged. There appeared to be a significant difference in the mindset about people held by managers from the mindset of those they managed. The mindset gap could be described as follows; those who are managed tend to consider that they are capable of achieving what needs to be done when given the scope and resources to do so. Whereas, managers in general appear to question the capability of their subordinates to perform and this reinforces their need to closely manage them. This gap in expectation is a major reason for the level of dissatisfaction that many employees experience from being unable to accomplish the best results that they know they can achieve.

Therefore, change is necessary and it has been interesting to note that an increasing number of books, magazines, and media have been commenting on the need for a different approach to managing. The general picture painted of current management practice is that it leads to average or mediocre results and the reasons quoted for this can be summed up as follows:

• The notion that corporate goals can be cascaded down an organisational hierarchy in ways that makes sense has been proved to be fictional.
• The focus on shareholder return in preference to dealing effectively with all stakeholders fails to inspire most employees with the exception of those receiving exceptional bonuses.
• A ‘bonus’ culture fails to actually motivate in a healthy way as it tends to generate greed and selfishness with the outcome of disenfranchising the majority of employees.
• Paying senior managers significantly higher benefits that those in key operational roles is one of the main weaknesses of the traditional hierarchical organisation.
• People referred to as ‘subordinates’ tend to feel, to different degrees, ‘second class’ employees.
• ‘Reporting to’ a manager implies a ‘master – servant’ relationship.
• The ‘boss’ is expected to have all the information and answers to the issues that their ‘reports’ have to deal with.
• Working within a functional silo means that the ‘boss’ will operate from that functional mindset that may not be in the best interests of the organisation.
• Many ‘bosses’ are out of touch with what goes on in the organisation, particularly the higher up the hierarchy they are.
• ‘Bosses’ working in a functional silo tend firstly to act to protect the function when things go wrong rather than focus on what needs to be done to fix the problem.
• A management hierarchy tends to demotivate individuals to the point that their energy and creativity diminishes and is encouraged to flourishes in out of work activities.
• The scenarios painted by top management often bear little resemblance to what is experienced by front line staff. Therefore, initiatives generated by management frequently fail to deal with real needs in the organisation.

It used to puzzle me that the structural and productivity weakness of hierarchies had not been recognised by management to the point where they actually acted to implement a more effective way of meeting all stakeholders needs and expectations. However, I soon realised that the policies, rules, practices, and general orthodoxy of hierarchical organisations were deeply embedded. Therefore, the ideas that follow are my suggested way of effectively engaging everyone in the mission and purpose of their organisations.

Components of this different landscape

As we move from the ‘noughties’ into the next decade it needs to be a time to implement ways to encourage every ‘employee’ to be engaged and committed to achieve their organisation’s purpose for being in existence. The following ideas would make up some of the components of a new managing landscape:

• Equip each colleague with a clear appreciation of what they are expected to accomplish expressed in terms that they understand.
• Make certain that they also appreciate the impact of their contribution to others in the organisation and how they can keep informed on their actual performance as an ongoing process.
• Provide them with the tools and materials needed to help them succeed in making their contribution.
• Set up teams or ‘communities’ of colleagues who are linked to the outputs required with the authority and accountability for their outcomes.
• Involve everyone in determining and selecting the organisation’s strategic options as a means of capturing inputs from all the operational ‘communities’.
• There is likely always to be a need for a ‘manager’ who has a responsibility for seeing that each ‘community’ is given the information and support necessary to enable it to succeed.
• The ‘manager’ will also be a member of the community with a specific contribution to make that is understood and accepted by the other ‘community’ colleagues.
• Bonuses are unlikely to be part of the landscape as new ways of recognising and rewarding colleagues will be developed that take account of the effectiveness of each colleague’s performance.
• Regular and ongoing feedback on performance and other relevant information would be central to keeping everyone informed of progress, issues, problems, and of colleagues changing, joining, or leaving ‘communities’.

This suggested landscape takes for granted that most colleagues will be committed, motivated and responsible when treated with respect and given the opportunity to be effective contributors. To achieve this some of the current language and notions need to be eliminated.

Removing some of the ‘corporate speak’

I wonder who dreamt up the idea of using the term “human capital” to describe a group of colleagues in an organisation. The term is a ‘switch off’ for most colleagues who also find “Human Resources” equally irrelevant. The quicker that those who have significant influence in organisation recognise that they are dealing with people who want to be individual. Not people who appear to fit easily into the square boxes frequently displayed in organisational charts. The language used in hierarchical organisations is aimed at controlling the actions of all its employees so that they will conform. The notion of ‘levels’ where you “go up to meet the boss’ or “go down to the shop floor” are examples of how the hierarchy uses language to remind its employees of the ‘master/servant’ relationship that exists. It was also interesting to note that although many of these organisations have embraced the concepts of “engagement” and “empowerment” that they attempted to implements these concepts within the management hierarchy orthodoxy. This means that employees are ‘given’ opportunities to engage and be empowered as per the perception of their managers. You can bet that if they become too engaged or empowered in ways that are perceived to threaten the security of their manager, action will be taken to restrict their initiatives.

I have described much of the language used in earlier blogs and don’t intend to repeat them here as I guess that most of you will already have a very clear picture of what I am getting at. The fact that many employees experience ‘fear’ is often due to the way ‘management’ and managers operated. It no longer surprises me when I am told by someone that they are fearful of their manager or of other colleagues who are in the manager’s ‘favour’.

The dinosaurian manager!!!

This is a theme that I frequently raise in my writing and working as a consultant/facilitator. The reason is straightforward in that I encounter a significant number of people who share their frustrating experiences with managers. After hearing from so many people I produced an e-book entitled “Dinosaurian Managers” – “how to effectively deal with them” as a free source of ideas. This e-book was stimulated by how many wanted ideas on how to handle the relationship with their manager without adversely impacting on their jobs. The ideas expressed have been drawn from the actual experiences of those who chose to act to improve the relationship. However, it is important to always remember that we are all different and this means that what works for one person may not work for another.

My passion is to find ways to assist colleagues to gain the confidence and skill to develop effective relationship as this is the only way to make working with others a worthwhile experience. I KNOW that the majority of those I meet are desperate to make a truly effective contribution from which they receive an appropriate reward that may not only be monetary. The problem is that many organisations just don’t know how to treat their people in ways that genuinely encourage them to be fully engaged and committed.

True engagement

My picture of true engagement can be described as follows. “To be truly engaged I need to believe that I am fully informed in ways that enable me to produce effective results. I need to be respected and valued for the contribution I make which would be shared in the regular constructive feedback I receive. I would feel part of my community because I am actively involved in agreeing how and what we need to contribute to fulfil our purpose. This would be achieved in the way we openly discuss issues to reach agreement on the action that I need to take in collaboration with my colleagues. I would have ready access to whomever I need to connect with in order to be an effective contributor. I would know how well I am performing, how well my community is performing along with other communities, and finally how well my organisation is performing. I would be encouraged to feel a valuable member of the organisation by all colleagues simply because they know that I am giving of my best to my community and therefore to the organisation”.

The result of an engaged environment described would be a high level of commitment, willingness to share and contribute, permission to empower oneself, keen involvement in what the organisation stands for and strong support of its brand. A sense of being valued; building self-confidence resulting in an even greater willingness to do ones best for the benefit of all.

Making the change

Making the necessary changes in working practice outlined above does not need anyone’s permission as it is really up to each individual to take action. The first step is to connect with like minded colleagues to form a community in which ideas on how to shape working practices that encourage engagement and cross-functional collaboration. Sharing information and ideas with colleagues can provide a very useful platform on which to firstly be informed and secondly know the action to take to create a truly empowered working environment. Patience will be needed coupled with a determination to succeed as other colleagues may be less than enthusiastic about what you are creating. However, as they see you beginning to enjoy your working relationships and be more effective this can be a big influence in getting others to come on board.

Proposing a new era for managing

In my next blog, I will suggest ways to create what some might believe is an organisational utopia. However, as we enter this new decade, the signs are becoming very clear that ‘people power’ is on the rise and almost anything that is perceived to be constructive is possible.

Tom

04.01.10