1
Leadership and Management
Abstract
This chapter discusses the differences between leadership and management and covers techniques and traits that are necessary for both.
Keywords
Accountability; Character; Communication; Courage; Decision making; Delegation; Empathy; Goals and expectations; Leadership techniques and traits; Leadership; Management; Optimism; Organizational structureLeadership and, to a lesser degree, management are the key factors necessary to make any type of organization efficient and effective—in fact, I believe that leadership in particular is going to be the ultimate factor in determining the success or failure of any organization and the business in which a group of individuals is. Unfortunately, leadership and management are not effectively put into practice in a majority of instances; I think that almost everyone has seen numerous examples of poor leadership and management in their business experience. This occurs in spite of the thousands of books that are written on the subject, the high-dollar seminars, the many courses on leadership and management that are offered, along with the dozens of degrees that are available on subjects relating to both leadership and management.
Due to the many less-than-stellar leadership and management techniques that are practiced, supervisors and managers are unable to achieve the main purpose of effective supervision—gaining the maximum efficiency and effectiveness of their employees to ensure that they meet their business goals and objectives. We will look at techniques for both leadership and management (which I believe are two very different concepts) while providing some helpful guidelines that can help you to improve your own leadership and management.
1.1. Relation Between Leadership and Management
President Harry S. Truman had one of the better definitions of leadership, saying “A leader is a man who has the ability to get other people to do what they do not want to do, and like it.” [1] With this definition in the forefront, leadership is something that is exclusively people-centric. Leadership deals mostly with people’s ability to communicate and interact with others to get them motivated and excited to accomplish tasks. Management differs from leadership. While it also concentrates on working with individuals, it is a process that is more focused on directing and controlling the affairs of a business, organization, or other body to ensure that it operates efficiently and effectively, to accomplish agreed-upon objectives [2]. In other words, leadership deals more with people, whereas management deals more with organizing the tasks that these people must accomplish to achieve business objectives. These two different aspects and definitions highlight the primary difference found between these two important functions. Although leadership and management both require skills to deal with people and to organize efforts and tasks, leadership is more directly linked to the ability to work and motivate people in order to get the most out of each individual, whereas management deals more with ensuring that the processes within an organization are understood, efficient, and measurable; stated otherwise, leadership is more focused on people and their wants and needs, and management is more focused on tasks.
Although there are differences between leadership and management, there is also a significant relationship between these two aspects. Good leaders must learn to practice good management techniques. Effective leadership requires the use of good management techniques, since good leaders must be able to efficiently delegate work and to ensure that all of their subordinates understand their roles and responsibilities. Unfortunately, the converse is not always the case, as many individuals who implement proper management techniques may not be good leaders. To better illustrate this relationship, let me tell you a story about a boss for whom I once worked. This individual had an extraordinary amount of leadership and management training and was very knowledgeable in both areas. This training equated with the fact that he was a very good manager—particularly in his ability to implement measurements that could identify problems within the organization. Unfortunately, this knowledge of good management techniques did not result in his being a good leader. Due to his strengths in management and measuring, he would typically sit in his office to review and analyze the reams of data that he had requested to work to identify issues within the organization. Although he was able to identify many issues early in his tenure in the leadership position, he could not implement most of these improvements, as he had failed to relate to the personnel under his supervision by insulating himself from them and their work. Furthermore, his ability to analyze management information would actually backfire when a decision was required. He would continue to ask for more and more information on the issue at hand instead of having the courage to make a choice when necessary, and, as a result, many of his decisions were either made too late to matter or were never made at all. This analytical ability and expertise in management techniques also affected his ability to lead, since he tried to make leadership a checklist process rather than focusing upon the people and their specific skills and needs. There were many instances in which my co-workers and I could actually see the boss’s thought processes as he tried to use every one of his management analysis techniques and attempt to fit them into the problem at hand to come up with a decision. He would work hard to see the problem, obtain all of the facts, discuss all conceivable courses of action with subordinates (over and over again in many instances), and work to try to gain consensus prior to his decision. He would finally decide upon a solution and work to implement the decision. Although the process sounded good, it resulted instead in significant problems within the organization because most people saw through this “cookie-cutter” approach to leadership that the boss used. People within the organization saw the boss fail to reach a timely decision, which led to the organization believing that the boss was indecisive and not sure what to do when problems occurred, which ultimately resulted in a loss of confidence in the boss by the majority of people in the organization. This use of good management techniques, but poor leadership and people skills, resulted in the boss failing to gain the trust or respect of the subordinates and the organization. This illustration highlights the need for good leaders to be good managers; however, a supervisor that effectively uses good management tools does not guarantee that good leadership will result within the organization.
The last difference between leadership and management that we will discuss involves the practice and application necessary for each area. Management is primarily based on defining roles and responsibilities, implementing processes, and analyzing measurement information to identify improvements and produce a better organization. This dependence of management on relatively concrete principles and practices results in objective procedures and data that can be directly used to implement effective management practices through the application of scientific guidelines and organizational principles. This is not the case with leadership. Leadership is a much more subjective talent, and can be difficult to break down and define exactly what traits will guarantee success. Simply put, management is more of a science and leadership is more of an art, which makes leadership impossible to practice through a checklist or cookie-cutter approach.
Over the next sections, we will look at both leadership and management and discuss some techniques and traits to assist you in improving in both areas.
1.2. Leadership Techniques and Traits
My experience has shown that we learn more leadership lessons from poor leaders and supervisors then we ever learn from good ones. That is because it is easy to see the resulting problems that occur from a poor decision or from inaction than to see the results of good leadership that result in the right decisions. In many cases, good organizations with good leaders just seem to work well, and it can be difficult to identify exactly what makes these teams work so well.
As is the case with most people, I’ve worked for good bosses and bad ones (although it sometimes seems that the poor bosses and supervisors have vastly outnumbered the good). With the bad bosses and leaders, many of the poor decisions were immediately apparent, since they resulted in some type of negative result shortly after the decision; this result could have been a decrease in efficiency, failure to achieve an objective, loss of confidence by employees or supervisors, or a loss of morale within the workforce. Although bad leadership can be painful to experience and to live through firsthand, many of these poor decisions and bad leadership examples can provide lessons for those wishing to improve their own leadership techniques. It would be nice to be able to work from the good examples; however, it has been my experience that it is much more difficult to determine what a good boss is doing and learn from that individual, because in most of these instances the organization simply seems to run well and work in an efficient and effective manner. How to identify a smooth operation and how it is being accomplished will not be as readily apparent to most observers without a good deal of study and analysis, so unfortunately it can be easier to learn from the bad leaders and their mistakes, since most everyone can identify what went wrong.
Another reason to work at improving your leadership skills is that the effect of poor leadership on an organization can make an immediate impact but take a very long time to fix. An unfortunate truth is that a bad leader can have an impact on an organization almost immediately through poor decisions and loss of morale among subordinates. All this will bring down the team’s effectiveness in a very short time, and it will take a much longer period of time to fix these issues than it took to create them. This makes it critical to provide the best leadership possible within an organization. Although leadership is an art that can be extremely difficult to accomplish well, we will look at some consistent traits that great leaders follow, so that all of us can keep them in mind in order to improve our own leadership skills.
1.2.1. Be Yourself
The first trait that all great leaders have is that they are true to themselves and do not put on an act in order to lead. This is critical for an effective leader, as one of the major problems with poor bosses is that they are often perceived as a “phonies.”” People will quickly see through any kind of act, and it will become more and more difficult for leaders to “talk the talk” when it is evident that they do not “walk the walk”” and match the personas that they are trying to put forth. A good example of a leader who does not put on an act and continues to ensure that he is true to his own character is Pope Francis, the former Cardinal from Argentina and current leader of the Catholic Church. Prior to becoming Pope, the Cardinal drove his own vehicle to work and lived a very modest and frugal life. After his elevation to Pope, it would have been simple to get caught up in the trappings of the Papal office; however, since his selection, Pope Francis has continued to try to maintain a simple and modest lifestyle. Even as the head of all Catholics and one of the most powerful heads of state in the world; Pope Francis continues to keep his own calendar, he maintains a modest living area within the Vatican, and he continues to try to maintain contact with the poor and less fortunate. All of these acts are what he typically did while still a Cardinal, and his work to maintain these actions have resulted in near-universal acclaim for his work in leading the Catholic Church and have earned him the moniker of “the “people’s pope.”
1.2.2. Have Empathy
I have always been surprised that empathy is normally not included in many lists of leadership traits. I believe that this is an error, and it is my opinion that this trait is one of the most important for good leaders. Empathy not only enables leaders to relate to their subordinates and establish better ties with the people who are doing the real work, but it also provides a significant ability to develop understanding with subordinates, which will ultimately lead to better decision making.
The unfortunate fact is that many leaders do not practice this trait. How many people have seen peers be promoted to management positions and, once there, appear to have lost all memory of what the main issues or problems were while they were working at the lower levels? One of the biggest jobs that leaders have is to make their subordinates’ jobs easier; by doing so, employees will see that their bosses care for them and their well-being, and will in turn work much harder and more effectively toward making the company’s business goals and objectives much more achievable. When people have been promoted up through the ranks, they have unique perspectives from which to better understand the issues and concerns of their subordinates; unfortunately, in many cases, newly promoted supervisors do not focus on this advantage but instead try to distance themselves from the very people who accomplish the real work within the organization. The leaders forget about these issues and concerns of their employees and do not attempt to solve them. There may be several reasons for this; new leaders may feel that they should distance themselves from the lower level from which they came in order to attempt to show their bosses that they can now think like senior management (or what they believe senior management should think like), or perhaps they wish to show senior management that their promotion was not a mistake. Whatever the reason, these newly promoted supervisors should work hard to remember what it was like in the lower positions, since it gives them empathy, which in turn will show concern for and gain greater effort from their employees.
Although it may be easier for individuals who have moved up through the ranks to empathize with their subordinates, all supervisors can gain empathy and understanding with their employees by using the tried-and-true technique of “management by walking around”(MBWA). Although the term was made popular by both Hewlett–Packard management in the 1970s and by Tom Peters and Robert H. Waterman, Jr. in their book In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies in 1982, the practice of checking on employees and operations on your own has been used by successful managers for a much longer period of time [3]. It is vital for all supervisors who want to be effective to get out from behind their desks and see with their own eyes what is actually going on. The advantages of moving out into the work areas and talking directly with the lowest-level employees are numerous. MBWA provides an actual hands-on perspective of the people and issues that are occurring in the supervisors’ areas of responsibility, rather than hearing the filteredand, in many cases, biased versions from third parties who would likely have a stake in the boss’s perspective.
It is vital for effective leaders to be able to place themselves in the shoes of their subordinates and to empathize with them. Not only will this help supervisors to make the employee’s jobs a little easier, it will also improve their ability to better understand their personnel, which will ultimately result in a better team.
1.2.3. Communication and Understanding
Communication is closely linked with empathy, since the ability to understand your employees enhances your ability to communicate with him—particularly in listening and understanding these individuals and their concerns. Being able to fully empathize with subordinates enables not only an improved ability to listen but in turn improves anyone’s ability to communicate. Eisenhower was an exceptional leader, both during his time as a military officer and also as President. This leadership was due in large part to his ability to listen and to be empathetic with the subordinates who were actually doing the real work. Whether he was training a small unit or commanding thousands, General Eisenhower never saw men as numbers or as push-pins to be moved across a battle map; rather, he always remembered that each man was an individual with hopes and dreams of his own, with a family back home who loved him more than anything else in the world. Eisenhower had a highly developed listening ability, and wherever he went he asked questions, welcomed complaints, and, if it was within his power, he worked to improve the situation. This effort not only endeared him to his troops but also enabled him to listen and to identify issues, which ultimately resulted in fixing problems within the entire organization. The ability to communicate and more importantly to listen and understand others is a critical aspect in people who are leaders.
Listening is a vital part of communication, as is the ability to directly talk with individuals. Technology has greatly assisted business, with the advent of different ways to communicate with others such as e-mail and social networking; and, although there are some advantages to these newer forms of communications, there are also drawbacks that have accompanied many of these advances. The biggest drawback that can negatively affect a person’s leadership ability is the loss of personal interaction and direct communication with people, either on a one-to-one basis or in groups. Many people have worked their way up the business ladder using texting and e-mails as their primary means of communication; these methods are easy, but they come at the expense of simple face-to-face communication. Although many of these newer techniques can be effective to accomplish many tasks, ultimately managers and leaders must be able to effectively get their messages across by talking directly with their subordinates. This skill is becoming lost because of the ease of sending an e-mail or a text; however, messages can become lost through these technological means. Remember that communication involves two participants—a sender and receiver—and these newer forms of communication do not afford any opportunity to get feedback from the receiver to see if the message was received and understood. As a result, communication through these methods can become confused or lost. This is why leaders must ultimately be able to speak with their personnel—either one-on-one or with larger groups in order to ensure that their messages get across.
Communication by leaders can also be enhanced by MBWA, which was also discussed in the earlier section on empathy. MBWA not only improves an individual’s ability to empathize with their subordinates, but it also provides opportunities for a supervisor to improve communication with the lowest-level employees. When I have been a supervisor and leader, it was always amazing how many times I would be walking around and talking with first-line employees only to hear them relate a rumor or version of company policy that was so far from the truth that it was hard to keep a straight face. Miscommunication happens all the time as items are passed from person to person; we have all played the telephone game as children, and can remember how simple phrases could be changed after only two or three repetitions. This miscommunication can be compounded within a large organization; but when employees can hear an issue directly from the boss, a lot of the miscommunication can be alleviated or prevented. Another advantage of MBWA is that it can provide greater face-to-face contact between bosses and their subordinates. With the ever-increasing amount of electronic communications, it has become easier and easier for supervisors to “manage by the ding.” By that, I am describing supervisors who primarily manage and attempt to lead through e-mail and other electronic means. How many supervisors simply sit and stare at their computers, waiting for that next e-mail or text message that will spring them into action? There are several problems with this practice. First, many problems are not brought up to the boss until they are significant and unable to be easily resolved, so that by the time the leader is notified of the issue by e-mail or message, it is too late. Another problem is that the message may not accurately portray the issue due to misunderstanding of the message itself, the bias of the sender, or a desire to sugar-coat the problem in the message. Instead of waiting for these messages and walking around instead, it is much easier to identify minor issues before they become major problems, and a leader can also alleviate the miscommunication that occurs through many of these electronic means and the misunderstandings that they can cause. Supervisors who work hard to communicate with their employees through all means—especially in a more personal manner—will ensure a greater degree of understanding and will achieve greater buy-in among their subordinates.
Communication is a critical aspect of good leadership. The willingness to truly listen to your personnel and understand their issues and concerns, the ability to talk with your employees face-to-face, and the effort to get out from behind your desk and forgo the easy way to communicate—texts and e-mails—and interact with all of your employees provides some important methods to improve your ability to communicate.
1.2.4. Optimism
Optimism is another critical component of effective leadership. Many exceptional leaders have learned to put forth a persona of perpetual optimism—even though they may not feel like it at certain points in time. There are several benefits with leaders who can maintain their focus on the positive.
The first benefit is the boost that the leader gains from being optimistic. It can be easy for many leaders to become wearied by the continual decision making—particularly when these decisions can potentially affect their business and the livelihoods of their employees. Even when these choices can be relatively mundane, leaders are asked to make countless decisions on a daily basis, all of which can add to an inexorable and inescapable strain and tension that can continue to wear away at the leaders’ endurance, judgment, and potentially even their own confidence. This pressure can become even more acute if the leader appropriately asks that their subordinates and staff present them with honest and, in many instances, the worst cases in many eventualities, since this results in hearing a lot of bad news and problems within the organization. All of this information can easily cause the leader to focus on issues and concerns, which places them in a position to continually deal with the negative aspects of the business. If leaders can maintain an optimistic viewpoint, however, their positive actions and sense of hope can tend to minimize potential problems that can wear any person down and perhaps even lead to demoralization.
Another benefit with an optimistic leader is that this attitude invariably filters throughout the organization and can produce many positive effects within the company. Leaders who can be positive even in the face of bad news will promote a culture of open and honest communication. We have all worked for people who frequently “shot the messenger”” when they were told of any problems or concerns. By doing this, bosses discourage anyone from providing them with bad news and ultimately make it impossible for anyone to give such leaders the true facts—especially if they do not agree with the boss’s perspective. If, on the other hand, bosses maintains an optimistic attitude and take bad news well, it is much more likely that bosses who are good leaders will get open and honest feedback, which in turn will promote a situation in which all employees put their effort into finding solutions and opportunities rather than focusing on the problem.
Optimism from the leader produces several positive effects within the organization. Leaders can minimize the amount of stress that is inevitable with their positions. This positive attitude can permeate the organization and lead to improved efficiency and effectiveness. It can also promote better communication throughout the organization. Leaders who can maintain an optimistic attitude can definitely improve their organization, due not only to the positive effects produced on the employees and staff, but also the positive effects on others who come into contact with such leaders and their infectious attitudes.
1.2.5. Character and Courage
Character and courage go hand-in-hand, and both traits go together in great leaders. Character is a must in any great leader, as it is critical in developing trust throughout the organization and ensuring that people do the right thing. Courage ensures that the leader has the fortitude to do the right thing (because, in many cases, this entails more difficult choices).
Character is defined by Oklahoma Congressman J.C. Watts as “doing the right thing when nobody’s looking.” He goes on to say that “there are too many people who think that the only thing that’s right is to get by, and the only thing that’s wrong is to get caught.” [4] Unfortunately, we see this rather frequently in today’s society, as witnessed by the many people who lie, cheat, and steal in all walks of life and, when caught, attempt to blame this bad behavior on anything but themselves. True leaders maintain this definition of character, however, and understand that this is a vital trait and one that successful leaders cannot be without for several reasons. First, leaders must be able to establish trust with their subordinates and co-workers, and character is critical toward establishing this trust. If an individual acts with poor morals and ethics, it is impossible for others to trust that individual, which, in turn, leads to many people wondering if anything that they accomplish for such a boss is for the good of the organization or only good for the individual asking for the work. Second, a leader with good character will highlight superb performance and pass on praise to their subordinates, whereas an individual with poor character will take the credit and pass on blame (even when the outcome may have been due to their own action or inaction). Workers who are not praised for their hard work and who are blamed for their supervisor’s mistakes will never put forth their best effort. Finally, leaders who demonstrate good character will filter these desirable traits to others across the organization and create a more desirable work environment, since the team will be focused on honesty and integrity.
Courage is another critical leadership trait and goes hand-in-hand with character. There are many ways to demonstrate courage: the willingness to take risks, making changes to the organization in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness, or identifying poor performance or behavior. This trait is necessary for a good leader. Courage can refer to either physical or moral courage. Physical courage is what we typically think of when we hear the term—it describes the ability to face situations that could cause someone physical harm or death. Although there may be times in any profession where physical courage is necessary (and in some professions, physical courage may be a somewhat frequent occurrence), it is much more prevalent in business that leadership requires moral courage. Moral courage is the willingness to maintain good moral convictions and to adhere to one’s character, even when these actions may place an individual in a difficult position with superiors, subordinates, or peers. People are more inclined to follow individuals who are able to overcome the instinct to run away from a difficult problem and instead to think clearly and take action that they know is morally and ethically correct and that results in the correct decision.
Character and courage are critical to good leadership. The morals and need to ensure that you act correctly and do the right thing, along with the courage to take that action in the face of possible repercussions, will pay dividends with your immediate subordinates and across the organization.
1.2.6. Decision Making
Although it should be obvious, a good leader must be able to make decisions. This trait ties in with having the character and courage to be able to make difficult decisions when necessary. We have probably all seen supervisors who could not make decisions—either they felt that they did not have enough information, they hesitated due to the gravity of the decision, or they were simply scared to make the decision. What every supervisor must remember is that if their subordinates have come to them with a problem, they are looking for a decision—they are not looking for a way for the boss to “pass the buck” or mull over the problem. Remember the quote from Harry Truman: “the buck stops here.” This should be a motto for many good leaders, since they must be able to have the courage and conviction to make a decision and stick with it.
1.2.7. Accountability
The last leadership trait I will cover is accountability. This trait is necessary in good leadership, as it should task the leader to ensure that people are meeting standards and that they properly adhere to the requirements within the organization. Many of the previous leadership traits that we have discussed are positive in nature; however, an unfortunate fact is that all leaders must occasionally deal with individuals who fail to perform or who refuse to act in an acceptable manner. This is where accountability becomes necessary.
In order to be effective, accountability must ensure that individuals who violate company policies and procedures are punished in order to discipline the perpetrator, correct the behavior, and deter further inappropriate action. This punishment should be fair based upon the specific violation and the individual’s previous disciplinary history. The punishment should also be consistent throughout the organization and not overly punish one individual while letting another individual evade punishment, which could lead to a perception of favoritism. The disciplinary action should also take into account what is necessary to correct the behavior of the individual. Lastly, the punishment should be severe enough to deter others from considering the same violation. Ultimately, accountability will reap positive benefits across the organization, since all employees will come to understand that unacceptable behavior or poor performance will not be tolerated, and it has been my experience that few people want to put up with the few “bad apples” in the bunch.
A good example to show the need for accountability can be found in one particular organization. In this agency, the maintenance supervisor made several questionable and possibly illegal financial decisions. These included his hiring of companies to accomplish work for the organization that were owned by his relatives and to whom he paid fairly high fees for minor work. He also made excessive numbers of business trips over several years with no results or gains to the organization. These trips not only failed to show just cause for the expenditures, but they also appeared to pay higher than normal travel costs to the maintenance supervisor. These issues were brought up to the organization’s senior leadership; however, no action was taken against the maintenance supervisor—in fact, he was not even counseled on these concerns. Due to this lack of accountability when the issues were initially raised, this same maintenance supervisor was eventually caught embezzling company funds several years later. The unfortunate truth is that if the organization had held the individual immediately accountable for the original questionable financial decisions, the embezzlement may not have occurred or at a minimum, and the individual would have been caught sooner, which would have lessened the losses to the organization.
Although accountability is one of the harder things that a leader must do, it is a necessary part of maintaining a well-run organization.
1.3. Management Techniques and Traits
Now that we have covered many of the traits necessary to good leadership, we will look at traits and techniques for good managers. As discussed earlier, good leadership will normally include good management techniques and traits, so it is important to identify these.
1.3.1. Well-Defined Organizational Structure and Appropriate Division of Labor
In my opinion, the most important aspect in effectively managing an organization is to establish an organizational structure in a manner such that all members clearly understand their own roles and responsibilities. In order to accomplish this, it is necessary to define these roles and responsibilities for every section and possibly even every team member within the organization. The ability to clearly define the organizational structure and to be able to easily explain this can pay great dividends in everyone’s effectiveness and efficiency in accomplishing tasks. I can remember when I first entered the workforce after finishing college, and the confusion that I felt about accomplishing even simple tasks. One of the primary reasons that many of these tasks were so difficult was my ignorance of what other teams and offices were responsible for within the organization. Until I was able to learn how each section worked together within the organization and what each team’s role and responsibilities were, it was almost impossible to determine who I needed to call for help or expertise to ensure that the work was done in the most effective manner possible. A goal of any organization should be to be able to draw their organizational chart in a simple diagram that is so easy to understand that anyone could identify what each section does. If you are unable to do this, it is very likely that you have failed to properly designate the roles and responsibilities within your organization. When team members can understand the role and responsibility of each section within the company, it makes things much easier not only to accomplish complex tasks but also to ensure that people do not waste time on tasks that other sections will accomplish.
In addition to developing and following a well-defined organizational structure, it is imperative that the roles and responsibilities of each individual match this organizational chart. Nothing can be more confusing than an organization that does not follow the organizational structure by the individual responsibilities. An example of one such organization would be the U.S. military headquarters within the Pentagon. I made my first trip to the Pentagon after I had already served in the military for several years. During this visit, I needed to conduct training and indoctrination prior to departing for a temporary assignment overseas in northern Africa. I spent one week in the Pentagon, working to accomplish some fairly simple tasks (or so I thought when I was first given the assignments). These tasks included getting some authorizations and equipment prior to my departure overseas; however, these assignments turned out to be anything but simple due to the uniqueness of the organization and responsibilities within the building that houses the U.S. military headquarters. When I first started to conduct these tasks, I went back to my experience and reviewed the organizational charts to determine what office I had to work with in order to get the assistance I required. After using this method for the first few offices I visited, I found that within the Pentagon this process did not work. In this labyrinth, I found instead that the people who were able to get things done for certain tasks bore little resemblance to the people or teams on the organization chart that I would have believed should have been responsible for accomplishing those roles. As a result, these tasks (which should have probably taken only half a day) ended up taking an entire week. I left the Pentagon in amazement at how this organization could function effectively and efficiently in the face of this organizational dysfunction that was due to the lack of fully established roles and responsibilities that adhered to the organizational chart.
1.3.2. Setting Clear Goals and Expectations
An effective organization must continually ensure that they can communicate goals that are simple for everyone to understand, that can be easily measured, and that are achievable. This is a standard mantra from most management books; however, it is amazing how many organizations fail to put forth goals and objectives that actually meet these criteria. There are many examples of organizations with poorly written goals and objectives. One school district’s goal has so many different objectives and goals that they cover over two pages and the first goal states they wish to review “programs, curriculum/instructional strategies, and assessment tools in order to evaluate and improve the achievement of students with different ability levels as they work to achieve the learning standard.” [5] I am unsure of what this goal means or how this can even be measured. Furthermore, this goal is not applicable throughout the entire school district since it does not apply to all employees—particularly the ones who may not directly deal with teaching and education, such as maintenance workers, bus drivers, or food service workers. Ultimately, a school district’s primary function should be to teach children, so why doesn’t the goal address this in a simple and measureable manner? Another example of a poor company objective is from Avon. Their mission statement begins with “Avon’s mission is focused on six core aspirations the company continually strives to achieve,” and then it goes on (and on, and on) [6]. It eventually ends at 249 words that cover topics ranging from surpassing competitors to increasing shareholder value to fighting breast cancer. While it may be great to try to do many important things all at once, an organization’s mission statement should provide employees and the world at large with one or two key goals that define success in that company’s specific universe—if the organization cannot encapsulate these thoughts into a sentence or two, they should go back to the drawing board and try again.
Good managers understand that their organization’s goals and objectives must be simple enough for everyone to understand, and these goals must be measurable; and, with this in mind, these managers will ensure that their organization’s goals actually accomplish this. If the organization’s goals and objectives do not meet these characteristics, the managers and organization are in danger of confusing both employees and clients, and furthermore, their goals will sound like double-speak. Convoluted goals and objectives can not only confuse, they can potentially result in causing subordinates to wonder if the organization truly wants to better itself or if the senior leaders simply wish to sound good for a certain audience.
1.3.3. Know Your People and Their Specific Skills
The next management technique that we will discuss is ensuring that you know your people and their specific skills in order to tailor the organizational structure and individual roles and responsibilities to best utilize individual skills. Although it is important to have a well-defined organizational structure with established roles and responsibilities for each individual, as discussed earlier, this does not limit a good manager to tailor the organization to ensure the best fit with the specific skills of certain individuals. The first part of this technique is ensuring that managers know their personnel in order to be able to identify any special skills. This is accomplished by getting out from behind one’s desk and seeing the work of individuals in their own office and environment; without knowing one’s subordinates, it is impossible to determine what specific skills or experience they might have. A great example of knowing one’s personnel and tailoring the organization around certain skills can be shown through a good football coach who will tailor his offense based on the observed skills of his quarterback and other players. If the coach has a tremendous passing quarterback and good wide receivers, he will likely modify his playbook to rely more heavily on passing plays; but if he has a very good running back and offensive lineman, he may weigh the playbook more upon the running game. Like a good football coach, a good manager will also tailor the organization and the individual roles and responsibilities based on key employees’ skills and experience. A business example could be a financial team that contains one individual who has exceptional attention to detail (perhaps to the point of being obsessive-compulsive). A good manager will realize this individual’s skills and provide that person with a job that best utilizes these traits, such as book-keeping or conducting financial audits within the organization. There are a variety of ways to achieve success when using the skills and experience of your personnel to their utmost abilities.
1.3.4. Delegating Work
Delegating work is another tried-and-true managerial technique; however, this is also a rare commodity in its actual occurrence throughout normal business situations. The main reason for this inability to delegate work is a lack of trust on the part of the manager to fully enable his employees with the necessary authority and responsibility. In order to trust the personnel to whom you will delegate work, you need to hire effective managers and leaders for the specific positions and tasks that they will perform. One of the key mistakes that many supervisors make in hiring individuals to lead teams under their supervision is to hire an individual that they would like to work for or that would fit into their own individual leadership style. This may work some of the time, but there are many instances in which the type of leadership and management for a subordinate section may be vastly different from the style that you may prefer. For example, an individual who is a terrific self-starter that can be given tasks in a broad sense so they can figure out exactly how to accomplish the effort may look to find other supervisors that fit that mold. This may work for sections that need little oversight and guidance; however, if the section has an extremely high turnover of personnel and accomplishes fairly simple and routine tasks over and over again, this type of leader may not be the right fit—instead, a micro-manager may need to be hired who has exceptional attention to detail and who can ensure that the details are correctly accomplished with that manager’s new and rotating personnel.
The following are some principles that can help managers to delegate work more successfully.
• Clearly articulate the desired outcome and goal of the task to be accomplished. Once you can fully communicate the desired end state, it becomes much easier to break down the task into any other desired results.
• Clearly identify any constraints and boundaries with which individuals will need to contend. This should include the lines of authority, responsibility, and accountability. In addition, individuals should be provided with instructions on how to progress and periodically “check in,” or report back, throughout the task. This should include telling them when they must wait to be told what to do, ask what to do, act and then immediately report results, or initiate action and report back only periodically.
• When possible, include people in the delegation process and empower them to decide what tasks are to be delegated to them and when.
• Match the amount of responsibility with the amount of authority; however, a manager must understand that although you can delegate some responsibility, it is impossible to delegate away ultimate accountability…remember, the buck stops with you!
• Delegate to the lowest possible organizational level, since the people who are closest to the work will always be best suited for the specific task—they are the individuals with the most intimate knowledge of the detail of everyday work. In addition, delegating to the lowest level also increases workplace efficiency and helps to develop people.
• Provide adequate support, and be available to answer questions. It is your job to ensure the project’s success through ongoing communication and monitoring as well as provision of resources and credit.
• Focus on results and concern yourself with what is accomplished, rather than dictating how the work should be accomplished. Your way is not necessarily the only or even the best way—particularly since you are not the person actually conducting the task. Instead, allow the individual to control his or her own methods and processes, which will facilitate success and trust. General George S. Patton, Jr. said it best: “Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.” [7]
• Avoid “upward delegation,” meaning the employee simply passing the task back to you in the event of any problems. If there is an issue, instead of allowing the person to shift responsibility for the task back to you; ask for recommended solutions and assist them in finding an answer.
• Build motivation and commitment when delegating the task. Discuss how success will have an impact on financial rewards, future opportunities, informal recognition, and other desirable consequences for either the organization or the employee. It is imperative that you provide recognition where it is deserved.
• Establish and maintain control over the task. Discuss timelines and deadlines with the employee and ensure that you both agree on a schedule of checkpoints at which you will review project progress. At these times, make adjustments as necessary and ensure that you take the time to review all submitted work.
In thoroughly considering these key points prior to and during the delegation process, you will find that you delegate work more successfully.
1.3.5. Know Your Place
The last managerial technique that we will discuss goes hand in hand with delegation: it is simply knowing your place and role within the organization. This means that each individual and, specifically, each senior manager, has a specific role that they must accomplish, and these executives should ensure they do not interfere with tasks that are the responsibilities of their employees. Instead, they must allow their subordinates to accomplish the tasks that they have been asked to accomplish. How many managers do we see that micro-manage work far below their level? This not only takes away from the organization’s efficiency and effectiveness, it also breeds an extreme lack of trust throughout the team.
I worked for an organization in which the overall supervisor spent the vast majority of time redoing and making minor corrections to letters and presentations that had been accomplished by subordinates, rather than providing guidance and vision for the future. The problem was that there was not anything wrong with any of these products—they simply were not what the overall boss would have developed or composed. This focus created several problems. First, employees worried more about minor issues contained within documents rather than the real substance or purpose of these products, which ultimately caused communication and correspondence from the company to suffer. Second, without any clear guidance from the boss on major issues within the organization, individual employees were forced to guess what needed to be done for the future of the organization. Since several different individuals were forced to make decisions regarding the future, many of these initiatives conflicted with others due to the lack of clear guidance from the top. Lastly, the boss spent so much of his time making minor corrections that he rarely (if ever) had time to actually do his job. Although all these tasks can take up a great deal of time and keep people very busy, it will not help the organization to improve.
It is easy to see if another individual is micro-managing tasks below their level—the hard part is to determine if you are actually doing this. The following questions may help you to determine if this is the case.
• Do you find yourself accomplishing an inordinate number of corrections to documents?
• Do you repeatedly send out formats for various documents within the organization? Do these formats change frequently (more than once every two to three years)?
• Do you find yourself dictating exactly how to accomplish tasks for subordinates?
If the answer to any of these questions is yes, you may want to work to delegate more of your tasks and concentrate more on your own tasks.
1.4. Conclusions Regarding Leadership and Management
I cannot emphasize enough the importance of good leadership and management within an organization. Although an individual can be a good manager and lack some leadership skills, it is impossible to be a good leader without practicing good management skills. The differences between these two areas show the distinction between leadership and management. Leadership emphasizes the people side of business and is more of an art in its practice, whereas management deals more with business techniques and organizational structures to practice many of the scientific and objective methods necessary for good managers.
Although there are differences between both leadership and management, it is possible to improve one’s ability to perform either area by emphasizing certain traits. Good leadership requires the following traits:
• Being yourself
• Communication and understanding
• Optimism
• Character and courage
• Decision making
• Accountability
Like leadership, good management must also follow certain techniques and traits:
• Well-defined organizational structure and appropriate divisions of labor
• Setting clear goals and expectations
• Knowing your people and their specific skills
• Delegation
• Knowing the place and senior management’s role in the organization
By keeping these traits in mind and adhering to them, it provides you with the tools to become a better leader and manager.
..................Content has been hidden....................
You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.