Empowering Leaders do not Micro-manage

A few months ago during a training session for church staff members, an assistant pastor was complaining that his boss, the lead pastor, was a micro-manager.  My response to the staff person was not what they wanted to hear. The other trainer sensed their frustration and affirmed their feelings and stated that leaders should allow their staff members enough freedom and latitude to "do their job". The assistant pastor left the meeting with their feelings toward their pastor legitimized. 

It is true that leaders should allow their subordinates the freedom to accomplish things on their own providing they are in line with the organizations goals. However, this assumes that the subordinated is competent and does not have motives that undermine the organization's mission.

Micro-managing leadership can also be called directing. Directing is a legitimate leadership technique depending upon the skill of the employee and the difficulty of the task.  Four leadership styles have been identified: Directing, Coaching, Supporting and Delegating. Two things determine which leadership style is the best: (1) the skill of the employee and (2) the difficulty of the task. These four styles can be thought of as points on a continuum with total control by the leader at one end and the total freedom of the employee at the other end. Each method of leadership is legitimate depending upon the skill and experience of the employee and the difficulty of the task. A less skilled employee will require more hands-on directive leadership, whereas the more skilled employee can be trusted to do the task with little or no supervision. The second determiner is the difficulty of the task. It is obvious that designing an organization's network is more difficult than picking up trash in the parking lot. Employee skill is not the only determiner, the leader must consider the two determinates together.

Four leadership styles:

Directing is when a leader gives instructions about what and how goals are to be achieved by the subordinates and then supervises them carefully.

Coaching is where the leader involve himself with subordinates by giving encouragement and soliciting subordinate input. However, coaching still requires that the leader make the final decision on the what and how of goal accomplishment.

Supporting is where the leader does not focus exclusively on goals but uses supportive behaviors that bring out the employees' skills around the task to be accomplished. The supportive style includes listening, praising, asking for input, and giving feedback. A leader using this style gives subordinates control of day-to-day decisions but remains available to facilitate problem solving. The leader is quick to give recognition and social support to subordinates.

Delegating is when the leader offers less task input and social support while facilitating employees' confidence and motivation in reference to the task. The delegative leader lessens his involvement in planning, control of details, and goal clarification. After the group agrees on what they are to do, this style lets subordinates take responsibility for getting the job done the way they see fit. A leader gives control to subordinates and refrains from intervening with unnecessary social support.

It is important for the leader to understand the nuances of this leadership matrix. I have made the mistake of assuming that employees could be effective with little or no support. The result was ineffective tasks. Lack of confidence in the employee by the leader and a decrease in feelings of self-efficacy in the employee can result. On the other hand, the tendency to micro-manage comes from the leader unable or unwilling to trust their employees with organizational tasks.

Be an Executioner

The fourth grade class was given an assignment to go home and ask their fathers what they did for a living and give an oral report the next day for a grade in social studies. The next day one of the boys reported to the class that his father was an executioner. The teacher questioned the boy, "Your father is an executioner, are you sure?" The boy confidently answered, "Yes, my dad said that he makes plans and executes them!'

The old saying goes: " There are three kinds of people, those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and those that wonder what happened.”

Organizations have realized that there are two kinds of people--thinkers and doers and they prefer to hire doers. Jim Collins famously uses the illustration of the bus. If you have the right people on the bus the problem of how to motivate and manage people goes away. Organizations usually prefer "doers" over "thinkers." Leaders like to have people around them that can get the job done. A great vision without the right people is irrelevant. Some organizations hire the smartest and most gifted people but if they are not doers, they usually have difficulty starting and finishing tasks.

IT IS EASIER TO EDUCATE DOERS THAN TO ACTIVATE THINKERS.

But is there an alternative to doers and thinkers?

While I was going to graduate school, I worked as a supervisor for a janitorial firm. As a supervisor, one of my jobs was to make sure jobs were done to the satisfaction of the customer. One job was without a regular custodian, so myself and another supervisor was called upon to clean a building until a regular employee was hired. The other supervisor and I showed up to do the job. The other supervisor was the ultimate doer and immediately began to work before we had even looked at the layout of the building. I followed his lead and immediately began to work. It was a large building and upon inspecting our work after completion we found things that were missed and had to re-do some of our work. My preferred method of work was to walk the job and get familiar with the setting and develop a plan of action in my head then get to work. After I discovered that the other supervisor was a doer, I made sure that we had a plan first whenever we worked together.

By nature I am a planner and organizations need planners, but I don't like to wait long before executing my plan. What is the distinction between doers, thinkers, and planners? Planners are doers with direction and thinkers are planners that are slower to action (the problem with thinkers is that they are usually slow to action). What planners need to be weary of is prolonging the wait before "doing." Some might argue that planners and thinkers are the same, but in my estimation a planner is a doer that follows a specific course of action.

The bottom line for leaders and managers is getting the job done. "Doing" without a clear course of action and "planning" without doing is ineffective and wastes time and resources.

BUILD ACTION INTO YOUR PLAN

Plans without action are useless. Every plan should  be broken down into action steps. The entire plan and each action step should be put on a time-table. The completion date of each of the action steps are "milestones."

10 STEPS TO DEVELOPING ACTION PLANS

1. Determine the ultimate goal

2. Examine options

3. Consider potential obstacles and results

4. Decide upon a plan of action

5. Establish a desired date for completing the goal

6. Break the plan into action steps

7. Assign a completion date for each action step (milestone)

8. Allocate resources

9. Start working toward first milestone

10. Celebrate completion of each milestone as a victory

KEYS TO SUCCESS

1. Be proactive - don't wait for perfect circumstances

2. Be flexible--plans usually change along the way

3. Be determined

4. Don't fear failure

5. Never give up

Chaordic Consulting II

The last blog described chaordic consulting as having an outside consultant identify internal and external factors which affect organizational efficiency. A force field analysis approach examines the goals of each system of the organization and the methods used to accomplish these goals. These are the driving forces. The hindrances to the accomplishment of these goals are then identified. These are the hindering or balancing forces. In this process, the consultant is making sense of organizational chaos and order. Force field analysis is a strategic tool use to understand what is needed for change in both corporate and personal environments.

The purpose of any consulting process is to help identify and implement procedures that will make the organization more efficient and productive. It is the job of management to keep the organization running, productive, and competitive. Some organizations have internal consultants or individuals that are trained in organizational behavior and theory. There is however advantages to having outside consultants evaluate the organizations operations. First, an outside consultant can view the organization structure and function without bias. Management may be unduly influenced by pet people, processes, or products that will not influence a consultant. Second, management is often too close to the systems to objectively assess them. Third, consultants have training and experience across a broad field of organizational practice and use this expertise to assess an organization.

Often leaders suspect a problem such as low morale and motivation. Organizations may be struggling to remain competitive, want to improve profits, increase production, reduce conflict, change organizational culture, or expand the company. Given the responsibilities of organizational leaders, they may not have the time or expertise to address these needs and turn to outside consultants. Chris Argyris lists three things necessary to any successful intervention. These are especially true to make sense of chaotic organizational situations and bringing orderly interventions. The first is valid and useful information. The consultant must be able to evaluate the organizational situation as it actually exists. The information comes from several sources. The basic information is empirical data. This includes balance sheets, profit/loss reports, employee statistics and evaluations, and any hard data that would give a realistic picture of the organizations health. The consultant should sign a confidentiality statement that any information will not be shared or used in any way other than to evaluate the organization. Other information is gained by surveys, interviews, and observation. The second necessary item for consulting is free choice. The client has the choice to implement the suggested intervention or not. The third necessary item is internal commitment. Internal commitment means the course of action that has been internalized by each member so that they experience a high degree of ownership and has a feeling of responsibility about the chores and its implications.

The consulting process includes several phases starting with the “entry” phase. The start or entry is the period where the organizational leaders and the consultant dialogue regarding the consulting process. This is not a sales pitch by the consultant, but a mutual examination of the consulting process from start to finish and the responsibilities of each party. The organizational leaders should be confident in the abilities of the consultant and the consultant should be confident in the ability of the leaders to provide accurate information and the commitment to the consulting process. Neither party at this time is committed to the process. Once an agreement has taken place, then the information is gathered. The amount of information, the process of getting the information, and the used of the information has already been agreed upon in the entry phase. This will probably require onsite visits by the consultant. Once the information has been acquired, the assessment/feedback process begins. The consultant may ask for clarification or request more information during this time. Based on the determinations in the evaluation process, plans are made in terms of goals and objectives. The consulting relationship can end at this point, but usually the consultant helps implement the procedures especially if the plan calls for additional training. Short term goals can be implemented and evaluated. Long term goals can be implemented and the consultant can be retained as a coach for the process or end the relationship depending upon the agreed upon life-cycle of the consultation.

Outside consultants help organizations help navigate through chaos and bring fresh and unbiased perspectives to organizational leaders.