Friday, March 12, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Hands On/Hands Off: The Dangerous Extremes of Botched Delegation
Anything taken to an extreme is bound to result in problems. It's much like riding a bike, a certain balance and motion results in a smooth ride. Speeding up when needed, leaning when needed, slowing down when needed. Try riding full out non-stop and you're headed for a crash. Go too slow and you're going nowhere. It's a balance between too much of a good thing and too little of a good thing. That goes for the two extremes of "botched delegation" in leadership.
Some leaders become the boss and think their job is to "be the boss" while their people "do the work." Let's call them MACROMANAGERS. Other leaders (particularly in times of pressure or crisis) feel that no one on their team can work the magic they can so they "take the wheel" instead of directing the driver. And even if they allow the driver to keep their seat, they pick apart each action as if the world will stop spinning if every move doesn't replicate how they would have done it. We call them meddling MICROMANAGERS.
Both extremes are a recipe for disaster in leadership.
Mr./Ms. Macro's leadership results in these outcomes:
In both cases, good people generally leave because life is too short. People don't leave bad companies, they leave bad bosses.
Think of Bear Bryant (substitute your favorite coach). When the game was on the line and the clock was running out would that great coach run from the sidelines, pulling on pads and a helmet and take over the next play? Or would he be up in the luxury box entertaining the wealthy boosters while his team is struggling on the field? Well...what's the answer?
Symptoms of MACRO MANAGEMENT:
Some leaders become the boss and think their job is to "be the boss" while their people "do the work." Let's call them MACROMANAGERS. Other leaders (particularly in times of pressure or crisis) feel that no one on their team can work the magic they can so they "take the wheel" instead of directing the driver. And even if they allow the driver to keep their seat, they pick apart each action as if the world will stop spinning if every move doesn't replicate how they would have done it. We call them meddling MICROMANAGERS.
Both extremes are a recipe for disaster in leadership.
Mr./Ms. Macro's leadership results in these outcomes:
- A staff that feels neglected and abandoned...or worse yet, hanging alone on a limb.
- A staff that won't grow or develop unless they find a mentor other than their boss.
- A staff that is overburdened and resentful of doing the work while Mr. Macro gets the credit.
- Ultimately, someone figures out the truth: Mr. Macro isn't needed...then it's "goodbye".
Then there's Mr./Ms. Micro whose style causes this kind of dysfunction:
- A staff fearful of making any decision or taking any action lest they are berated or worse.
- A staff resentful of the lack of trust, longing for an environment where they are allowed to learn and grow.
- A product that suffers because no one person can have all the great ideas and techniques and, in fact, some of Micro's people are actually smarter than he/she is on some things. But the organization will never benefit from those great ideas.
- A high stress level because everyone feels they'll never be "good enough."
In both cases, good people generally leave because life is too short. People don't leave bad companies, they leave bad bosses.
Think of Bear Bryant (substitute your favorite coach). When the game was on the line and the clock was running out would that great coach run from the sidelines, pulling on pads and a helmet and take over the next play? Or would he be up in the luxury box entertaining the wealthy boosters while his team is struggling on the field? Well...what's the answer?
Symptoms of MACRO MANAGEMENT:
- When asked for the details of the activity of your people you have to put on "tap shoes" because you really have no clue.
- You go days at a time without strategic and tactical discussions with your team because there is no structure in place to foster this...forget about those great "in the hall' sessions...they never happen.
- You pat yourself on the back about what a great delegator you are, but in your heart of hearts you know that if you lost two of your key players you would be "dead meat".
Symptoms of MICRO MANAGEMENT:
- Everyone tenses up when you walk into the room and no one will offer an idea or suggestion...just a hesitant fearful look to see what YOU think.
- You're DOING instead of DIRECTING. Imagine a conductor who steps down off the platform and takes the instrument away instead of standing next to the player and working together to find the sound.
- You constantly whine to yourself that you have to do EVERYTHING and these people are all IDIOTS. If so, either you are a micromanager or a lousy recruiter...or both!
So, what's the "sweet spot" in the middle of the two extremes? Glad you asked.
- You don't DO everything but you KNOW ABOUT everything. You ask GREAT QUESTIONS.
- Your team is quick to approach you for help and counsel on what they are doing...you sense they feel that you are their coach. You are "side by side" with them...not too distant and not shoving them out of their chair. You have a structure and schedule that assures this kind of interaction.
- You strike a balance of knowing when to zoom into great detail and when to back off. You keep track to be sure you aren't doing either one to the extreme.
Think of this like teaching our kids to drive: you let them have the wheel; teach them what to watch for; and you don't let us get in a crash! Focus on this balance and your people with "rise up and call you blessed!" Okay, maybe not, but at least they'll see you as their coach and not as either a control freak or an absentee father.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Give Thoroughbreds What They Need IF "The Juice is Worth the Squeeze"
"He/She can really produce for us but he/she can be such a pain!" I hear that cry from leaders on a fairly regular basis as I coach them on dealing with high performance/high maintenance people on their team. I call these kind of people "thoroughbreds", some of their co-workers call them "nuts" or worse. I don't remember where I got the metaphor but I've used it for years.
The premise is this (at the risk of offending either some people or some animals depending on who you are referencing with this example): To bring out the best in people you must understand their personality and psychological make-up. There is something to be learned by the difference between the thoroughbred race horse and the old reliable workhorse.
You can accomplish a lot of good, steady work with a tough workhorse. The workhorse is bred for just that purpose. Not for speed or show, just good old fashioned strength and endurance to plod along and get the job done. They will take a lot of hard work and even accept a tough taskmaster without a whole lot of complaining. You can yell at them one minute and then love on them the next and they'll just keep plodding ahead. However, you'll never see anyone at Churchill Downs hanging a horseshoe shaped floral arrangement around the neck of one of these creatures.
Then you have the high-strung, high-maintenance thoroughbred. A horse that requires special care but one that delivers special results. This horse works equally as hard as the other in what they do best: flying like the wind. Their performance is what wins accolades and puts the farm on the map (and the prize in the owner's pocket). However, they are sensitive and require special care, feeding, and training. They can be expensive to have around but if they win races the payoff can be grand.
In her article: "Thinking the Way Animals Do", Temple Grandin, an assistant professor of animal science at Colorado State University writes..."Horses with calm placid dispositions are more likely to habituate to rough methods of handling and training compared to flighty, excitable animals. The high-strung, spirited horse may be ruined by rough training methods because he becomes so fearful that he fails to learn, or habituate.
On the other hand, an animal with a calm, nonreactive nervous system will probably habituate to a series of nonpainful forced training procedures, whereas a flighty, high-strung nervous animal may never habituate. Horses who are constantly swishing their tails when there are no flies present and have their heads up are usually fearful horses. In the wild, horses put their heads up to look for danger." http://tinyurl.com/cdgzgk
By now you've figured out the comparison to our people. We have some people who are good, solid players who deserve our love and respect because they get the job done to a certain level without a lot of complaining or high maintenance work. But, if we want our place to really shine at a different level we'll need that other kind of player who, though they require special handling, bring great rewards.
That term "special handling" is the lesson here. If you are going to have a thoroughbred in your barn don't be naive or grumpy about what is required of you. They will need more time and attention than the others. They will constantly be fearful that you don't love, respect, and appreciate them. They will constantly need your help with their insecurities and paranoia about their status. You will have to give them more time and carefully think through every interaction. However, when they run like the wind you can be the BIG WINNER.
Here's the balancing caveat: you have to be sure to constantly calculate the reward versus the investment of time and trouble these players may require. My friend Dave Santrella calls it the "grief to dollar ratio." I ask: "is the juice worth the squeeze?" Either way, only you can determine if there are enough blue ribbons and sweepstakes payoffs to live with the care and training of this kind of team member. You'll also have to work harder as a leader to keep them from tearing down the barn and running off all your workhorses.
Every hard working farm needs some good workhorses. But, if you aspire to have a farm that gets noticed for major accomplishments, you'll need a thoroughbred or two. Each must be handled differently and you, the leader, have to know the difference and "do the math".
The premise is this (at the risk of offending either some people or some animals depending on who you are referencing with this example): To bring out the best in people you must understand their personality and psychological make-up. There is something to be learned by the difference between the thoroughbred race horse and the old reliable workhorse.
You can accomplish a lot of good, steady work with a tough workhorse. The workhorse is bred for just that purpose. Not for speed or show, just good old fashioned strength and endurance to plod along and get the job done. They will take a lot of hard work and even accept a tough taskmaster without a whole lot of complaining. You can yell at them one minute and then love on them the next and they'll just keep plodding ahead. However, you'll never see anyone at Churchill Downs hanging a horseshoe shaped floral arrangement around the neck of one of these creatures.
Then you have the high-strung, high-maintenance thoroughbred. A horse that requires special care but one that delivers special results. This horse works equally as hard as the other in what they do best: flying like the wind. Their performance is what wins accolades and puts the farm on the map (and the prize in the owner's pocket). However, they are sensitive and require special care, feeding, and training. They can be expensive to have around but if they win races the payoff can be grand.
In her article: "Thinking the Way Animals Do", Temple Grandin, an assistant professor of animal science at Colorado State University writes..."Horses with calm placid dispositions are more likely to habituate to rough methods of handling and training compared to flighty, excitable animals. The high-strung, spirited horse may be ruined by rough training methods because he becomes so fearful that he fails to learn, or habituate.
On the other hand, an animal with a calm, nonreactive nervous system will probably habituate to a series of nonpainful forced training procedures, whereas a flighty, high-strung nervous animal may never habituate. Horses who are constantly swishing their tails when there are no flies present and have their heads up are usually fearful horses. In the wild, horses put their heads up to look for danger." http://tinyurl.com/cdgzgk
By now you've figured out the comparison to our people. We have some people who are good, solid players who deserve our love and respect because they get the job done to a certain level without a lot of complaining or high maintenance work. But, if we want our place to really shine at a different level we'll need that other kind of player who, though they require special handling, bring great rewards.
That term "special handling" is the lesson here. If you are going to have a thoroughbred in your barn don't be naive or grumpy about what is required of you. They will need more time and attention than the others. They will constantly be fearful that you don't love, respect, and appreciate them. They will constantly need your help with their insecurities and paranoia about their status. You will have to give them more time and carefully think through every interaction. However, when they run like the wind you can be the BIG WINNER.
Here's the balancing caveat: you have to be sure to constantly calculate the reward versus the investment of time and trouble these players may require. My friend Dave Santrella calls it the "grief to dollar ratio." I ask: "is the juice worth the squeeze?" Either way, only you can determine if there are enough blue ribbons and sweepstakes payoffs to live with the care and training of this kind of team member. You'll also have to work harder as a leader to keep them from tearing down the barn and running off all your workhorses.
Every hard working farm needs some good workhorses. But, if you aspire to have a farm that gets noticed for major accomplishments, you'll need a thoroughbred or two. Each must be handled differently and you, the leader, have to know the difference and "do the math".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
