esrosedotblog

THE THOUSAND YEAR OLD MAN-AGER

I was asked to give an interview about management.

It has been a long time since I was a manager or thought much about it. When I retired, I retired.

People ask me to look at their stuff and I decline as gracefully as I can. I am not in the management business anymore.

But this time my ego won out and I said "yes". It went pretty well.

In fact I like the result.

It was done on email so the Q&A is intact.

Maybe there are some other people interested in what the old manager has to say.

Q: What is your background in terms of education and experience?

A: I have had three careers, actually. I trained as a biochemical engineer and my first job was in the engineering department of a large food company. I worked on automated production lines. Coffee roasting, dairy, and so on. During this time I learned that if workers in a processing plant are not on board with a project its probability of success is substantially reduced. I got interested in production.

So, I began work as a production planning manager at another company. This position had to do with all aspects of a production operation from raw material to final product. Getting the resources required at the right place at the right time for the maximum profit. Once again, I saw the importance of people's managerial skills. No matter how well the production was planned the execution would suffer if people were not managed well. And positively.

This led to my interest in management training, particularly creative group problem solving. I left "real work" and joined a small training company that was doing ground breaking work in the field.

Eventually I became interested in group leadership and managership and joined forces with another guy who had a PhD (I did not) and a track record in this field. We started our own company and it lasted for 35 years before we let it go to others to manage.

Up to founding my own company, I spent about 5 years at each of the jobs that I had. This was a good formula for the times and may still be but I seem to experience that young managers move around more frequently now. I think that is too bad. No depth in one discipline.

Q: Now for the hard ones...What is your definition of leadership?

A: Easy one. I pull it out of my hat. The old American Management Association definition still holds: Getting things done through other people.

Q: In your opinion, what does a leader do that distinguishes him/her from others?

A: A good leader is flexible in the use of management skills. S/he designs the approach to problems by analyzing the situation and choosing the most appropriate tools or style to manage the process. For example, most situations require one of 5 different styles or approaches: The first would be a logical approach, a reliance on facts to get people on board and committed. A second would be personal motivation. Showing how you expect specific things from the person. Evaluating their performance in the past and offering incentives as well as pressures to change the way they are doing the job. A third style would involve careful involvement of the other's opinions or blocks to progress. A willingness to disclose one's own uncertainties and difficulties and a commitment to deep listening to the other's needs in the situation. A fourth style would involve inspiration. Creating a common set of values and creating a joint vision of success. A fifth style would be to disengage. Let the followers follow on their own. Provide clear goals and then let go with occasional meetings to check on progress.

I am cheating though. This is the model that we taught at my company. Most people are good at one or two of these styles or approaches but not the others. To have all five is to be ultimately flexible.

Q: How would you characterize your own leadership style?

A: Almost all personal assertion of wants and needs and bargaining personally with the other to achieve the outcome. The second style. I can do all the others but that is the one I am best with. I am also good at disengaging and letting go. Giving others space to get the job done on their own speed and approaches.

Q: Whom do you consider as a "great leader?" Why?

A: Currently, I would say, Barack Obama. He is a pragmatist. He leads by vision and sharing common ground (number four) in the public eye and face to face, I hear, he uses them all.

Q: How do budgets influence how you lead?

A: I have to work with someone to get the budget I need or want. Then I don't have to worry about it. In my own company, I was the boss so I got what I wanted. I did have partners but mostly we worked from the same principles.

Q: What are some personal rewards you experience as a leader?

A: Here we are back at the definition of management. Getting things done through other people. Results. The score board. In my own company it was healthy growth. We got to about 25 employees in one spot. The most I could manage.

Q: One final question. How did you handle people with different abilities and intelligences?

A: First, I never assumed anyone was either differently able or differently intelligent. Truly.

Not because I believed it to be true but I was the last person to figure out who was and who was not either one.

And I never, ever accepted others' estimates of their peer's abilities in advance.

That basically means that I started from the "they are OK" end and allowed performance to tell me what deficits there might be.pResults oriented.pI am not a naive manager. I would not put someone deeply over their head

But, in the average situation, where someone is already in place, I would work from results.

I know that people have strengths and weaknesses but I would rather they be revealed in action rather than in the abstract. Then coaching and teaching become the manager's responsibility with the employee in question.

I cannot give people abilities or intelligence. I can give them a chance to perform and improve their performance.

It is critical incidentally that the manager know how the job could be done preferably from having done it him or herself at one time or another.

You would be amazed (or not if you think about it) at how some real dumb asses can get a job done and some real smart asses can hinder a team's performance or, if working individually, can have their ego and self love interfere with results and piss other people off.

Performance, performance, performance. Coaching, coaching, coaching.

Labels: life, management, wisdom