|
|
|
Download PDF
The Middle Management GapI visited a company recently that had a really terrific senior management team. This was a group of dynamic, forward thinking people who were taking the organisation forward in a difficult market place. They were seeking out new and innovative ideas and allowing themselves to look at their business with totally fresh eyes. They wanted to define the way this industry would operate in the future. These were leaders prepared to go out front and blaze a trail. Below them were a bunch of managers who were keen to please and wanted to be seen as doing their job right. A few were open about their doubts and quick to point out that “this is not the way we have done it around here..” or “that won’t work because....” Most were not openly questioning or negative, but inwardly they had their doubts and felt uncomfortable about the drive and push towards un-chartered territory. There were a couple that wanted to believe but decided that someone had to keep their feet on the ground without being negative and duly appointed them-selves in that role. This group are a typical example of ‘managers’ and not ‘leaders’. I found that these middle managers were very focused on the day-to-day business and not on the strategic direction or issues facing the business. They were wrapped up in making the systems work and not on what needed to happen in the future. This is typical of a ‘manager’. A manager sets out to manage (and ‘managing’ is too similar to the word ‘coping’ for my liking!!!). He or she seeks to set systems in place and ensure that people are doing the right thing at the right time. One manager even said to me that he “didn’t want to distract his people with discussion on what might happen”, but rather he wanted them to “get on with what needed to be done today”! These middle managers were leaving it to the Senior managers to tell them what needed to be done. Yes, they had heard the senior managers ask them for their input, but they did not see this as part of their role as a manager. They didn’t even see themselves as being an obstacle but rather saw themselves as making sure the ship stayed on an even keel whilst the senior management went about turning the ship around!! They were focused on maintaining the systems, adhering to rules (written under the way the business would not operate any more) and working the systems in place. If the senior management wanted something done, they would try to build it into the current way of doing things. The trouble with this group of middle mangers is that they perceive themselves as being a passenger on a ship. In fact it would be better to describe them as being the passenger on a motorbike. When the motorbike rider tries to tilt the bike into the bends, they are the type of passenger that tries to stay upright! There is no wonder that most small to medium size businesses do not make it to being large businesses. The management style needed to set up a small business is different to the one needed to run a larger business. More than that, the style of management needed to run a business that wants to be a trail blazer is very different from the style of management that was needed to run that business in the last ten years or more. The modern city of Singapore is not the modern city it is today because it kept the thinking of fifty years ago. Companies and countries are changing because they dare to think differently and change or adapt the way people at all levels think and act. So what is going wrong in this company? Are the senior managers not communicating with the middle management? Not at all. They have regular briefs and discussions. Senior management work hard at trying to communicate and get the message down to all levels in the business. What the senior management team have not done is to define what they expect of managers who work in the business now. The assumption that the managers are knowledgeable, capable and even willing to make the step to working in the new business, is a simple but common mistake. By contrast to the company I described to you at the start of this brief, this week I went into a business that I had visited three years ago. The company had appointed a new factory manager about three months previously and this man had brought in systems and disciplines that made a big positive impact on the company in so many ways. Three years later I could hardly recognise the place. The factory was laid out so much better, the systems were very obviously in place and working. There were clear notice boards with graphs showing week by week progress against targets. It looked and felt so much better. Yet when I spoke to the Directors of the business they were getting frustrated by what they called the unwilling attitude that the same factory manager had to their ideas for the future. Even the staff commented to me that he was a “great guy but not exactly a dynamic leader”! This factory manager that took the company from one level and raised it three or four levels at least, was the same person that was now stopping it going to the next level three years later!! All the while the competition was gaining ground and starting to bite at their position. So my questions are once again two fold:
Defining the style and type of leadership your business needs is an important step in the planning process and one that is often over looked. This week Tony Blair said during his Conference speech, ‘I have not changed as a person but I have changed as a leader’’. Now we may all argue whether that has been for the better or the worse, but change he has. It is easy for us sitting on the sidelines to pass comment as to whether the change was enough, the right change or even if it was too much. The point is he changed to meet the needs he saw was necessary. ARE YOU CHANGING? If you say “yes” then I have to ask “to what?” Because changing because you have no choice, is not the right sort of change you need to make. If you are looking back and saying “look I have changed” then your change may be because you are getting older and more short tempered or because you had to change because of an incident that happened or some other reason that says you changed in response to the world around you. My point is this, you need to plan the change you need in your leadership style and ability to meet the needs or plans you have for your organisation. In other words you should be planning the change to meet the needs of your organisation based on where you are planning to go. The same applies to the people in the middle management position of your organisation. You need to know what type of leadership style and ability you need from them and then make sure that they can alter their style accordingly. I went to a very large school recently that had managed to achieve this from their middle managers. They managed to change the Heads of Department from focusing on what the lessons should include to defining how they were going to raise standards and attain higher grades from the students. Middle managers were discussing the ethos they wanted to create and how they could make better use of their limited time. The senior management team were now ‘freed up’ to look strategically at what the school needed to be doing in the next five years. They were benchmarking themselves against external organisa-tions looking for involvement with the community and seeking ways to partner with businesses. Was the transformation easy? Of course not. However, it started with knowing what they wanted from the middle managers and helping them get there. Have a great month and may you find the leadership you need to meet the goals you have set.
|
|
|||