If you follow sports, you soon become exposed to the “we don’t like the coach” syndrome. Typically this phenomenon occurs in professional sports where stars earn seven-figure salaries that are guaranteed. Fans who have no such guarantees regularly criticize these players on talk radio, online, and in the stands.

Poor raises an important question far beyond the world of sports. The question is what do employees owe a manager they do not like nor trust? This question gets to the heart of the matter about poor management. For all the castigation poor managers receive, and rightly so, don’t employees have some responsibility for productivity beyond what their manager directs? Of course they do. Employees who are paid fairly owe management an honest effort regardless of dislike for a particular manager. Here are some suggestions for dealing with a manager you don’t like.

Do your job. Be responsible for the effort you expend. Coordinate with colleagues as much as possible. Follow directives from your boss when you can. Sometimes this means extra work. Protesting will not get you very far. Senior management will expect you to do your job regardless.

Act professionally . Suck it up. You were hired to do a job. This is cold comfort for many employees toiling under managers who are incompetent. You can take pride in the work you do produce; make it the best you can.

Plead your case . Keep a record of what you do and how you do it. Observe how your colleagues interact with your boss. If they too are frustrated by the manager’s lack of ability, then you may be wise to present your case to senior management. Tread very carefully. Many bosses have friends in high places. Also, no manager likes to receive complaints about another manager especially one for whom he is responsible. If you are arguing for the manager’s transfer, you must argue the business case. Demonstrate that the boss’s behavior is harming efficiency and productivity.

Now there are exceptions. No employee should have to put up with an abusive boss, one who bullies subordinates with behaviors that undermine personal dignity. Sad to say, most organizations have managers who fit this bill; it is a problem not only for employees but also for management. Managers who abuse others need to be removed from the workplace. Sadly that does not occur often enough much to the misery of employees under their control. And as a result productivity and morale suffer.

When the manager is merely incompetent, or perceived to be so, the employee still owes the employer good performance. Most often that productivity will not be optimum because of managerial ineptitude, but employees owe management a good effort. And in turn, management owes the employee effective supervision as well as good leadership.

Failure to provide this is a failing, but it cannot be an excuse for failing to do your job.

Change for the sake of change is never good, but so often organizations spin through change initiatives like dealers at the roulette wheel. Senior managers push for change because they encounter a roadblock or sense a lack of momentum. Rather than probe for a fix, they wave their arms and push for change — big changes. These managers confuse the motion of change with purpose of change. In reality, the effort is wasted motion, draining energy and resources. In the long run, such churnings deplete enthusiasm and breed apathy. Therefore, senior leaders must first provide solid reasons for change initiatives, and then use their communications to drive the process. Here are some things to consider:

Relate the WIFM (What’s in It For Me) People evaluate with their intellect, but often choose with their hearts, i.e., the cognitive versus the affective. Managers must structure their appeal in this way. Consider a three-step process:

State the benefits to the organization. Speak of how this change will improve competitiveness as well as long-term stability. One, address the hardships. Change is seldom pleasant. It puts us out of our comfort zone. Managers must be realistic and not gloss over this aspect. If they do, they cheapen their credibility; their case for change gets lost in corporate palaver. Two, talk up the benefits. Emphasize what change will mean to individuals and teams, specifically noting benefits that relate to personal destiny. People want to know that they have some control and so if the change initiative relates to increasing autonomy and spans of control, stress it. If the initiative will do just the opposite, then promote the benefits of tighter control in terms of work flow and customer satisfaction.

Sell the benefits. The root of salesmanship is persuasion. And with any transformation, you need plenty of persuasion to succeed. When managers communicate change, they must do so with a note of enthusiasm and hint of passion. Talk about how the new change will affect the daily grind. While there is always pain in change, look for jewels that exemplify the gain both short and long term. For example, in a sales reorganization, play up what it will mean in terms of selling to more people or fewer but more select customers. Include comments on incentives. Also, emphasize what the change will bring in terms of opportunities for personal development and promotion.

Praise individuals. Who is doing the real change? Very often it is not the senior leaders; they are busy masterminding the entire process. The real change comes in the trenches where the real work is done. Companies must find ways to find examples of how people are changing and what impact such change is having on the work flow as well as customer satisfaction. Play up those stories in company newsletters and websites. At the same time, leaders can feature those stories in their speeches and meetings throughout the company. Such stories not only recognize individuals and teams, they mark progress with the change initiative. It is also appropriate to include metrics that quantify the improvement; again this contributes to momentum but appeals to our logic that values sound strategy and planning.

Excerpted from “Heart of Change” by John Baldoni CXO Media 2004

What kind of manager may be hurting your company’s ability to perform according to plan? The boss who is “too nice.”

That is a conclusion explored by Wall Street Journal columnist Jared Sandberg his column on managers who avoid conflict either to keep the peace or to avoid confrontations. The havoc that abusive bosses seems much better known but in reality the “kill ‘em with kindness” boss may be doing just that: stifling his people and in the process ruining productivity.

The non confrontational boss problem goes beyond individual bosses; its causes are systemic. People are promoted into management with little or no training. While a pharmaceutical company would not hire a researcher without a science background, nor an accounting firm hire an accountant who could not read a spreadsheet, companies in so many industries do the equivalent when they promote managers without preparing them first to manage, and second to lead. People are thrust into management positions for which they are ill prepared and possibly ill suited. They accept the position one, because it’s offered; two, because it represents advancement; three, because they fear retribution for turning it down.

Yes there are many in house management training programs, as well as myriads of training programs available everywhere from the finest universities to the local community college. But so often due to time, circumstance and cost, inexperienced managers are not given the opportunity to learn and so they are thrust into the deep end without a life preserver. And so it’s no wonder that so many flounder. They either ape behaviors of a previous boss (authoritarian) or avoid those and so become non confrontational. So what can be done?

Select candidates carefully . When considering someone for promotion to management, assess her ability to manage others. Interview her about working with others and supervising them. Evaluate through assessments how suited for management this individual is.

Give them options . Going into management for many people means giving up what got them promoted. That is, they are good engineers, financial analysts, purchasing agents, or marketers. For some, moving into management means giving up what they love to do. Ask them if this is okay? For some, it’s not an option; they simply do not want to manage others. [Note: beware of people opting for management simply for pay; many companies provide parallel pay tracks for high performers in specialty fields, engineering, IT, design, and so forth.]

Coach them/mentor them. Be available when the manager takes the reins. The manager’s manager needs to be ready to lead his new charge; that is provide him with insight into expectations and delivery. This is not micro-management; it’s one-to one coaching. Also consider getting the new manager a mentor, someone who is removed from the day to day management can advise and counsel with a level of disinterest.

The cost of avoiding management development is may be too high. As David Bradford of Stanford’s business school tells Sandberg, "In a knowledge economy, where work is more complex and interdependent, people need feedback more -- what they particularly need feedback on are on things that are difficult to give: one's interpersonal style." The question then becomes not whether you can afford management development, but can you afford not to provide it.

Source: Jared Sandberg “Cubicle Culture: Avoiding Conflicts, The Too Nice Boss Makes Matters Worse” Wall Street Journal 2.26.08

Have you ever found yourself in a meeting frustrated no end by your inability to get people to follow your argument? Do you find you do not have the words to shape your argument? And do you feel that someone is using position rather than reason to trump your ideas? Of course you have. We all have found ourselves tongue tied or at a loss for words to describe our ideas in ways designed to win others to our point of view.

Before it happens to you again, you may be ready to try some jujitsu argument. Jujitsu is a martial art that is based on leveraging an opponent’s strength against himself. For example, a smaller and lighter weight football team may use a spread offense where players stretch the field of play by running and passing to gain an advantage over bigger and heavier and less nimble football teams. The same can apply to arguing your point of view.

Before you can do anything, however, you must consider the outcome. That is, what do you hope to accomplish. If the stakes are important to you, plow ahead. On the other hand, if the odds are stacked against you, perhaps you are wiser to wait another day. That said if you want to argue, here are some suggestions.

Identify your opponent’s strength . Consider the foundation of your opponent’s argument. Your adversary (at least in terms of the argument) may be a technical wizard, or he may be the recognized expert in his field. Or perhaps his experience in the company gives him an understanding of the issue.

Consider your strengths . What do you bring to the table? Your experience matters, too. You may know the customer. You also may have some new research that counters a prevailing point of view. Echoing the voice of the customer is often a good entre, particularly if you position yourself as a customer advocate.

Leverage your strengths . Use your strength to counter your opponent’s strength. If you have customer insight, share it with the team. If you have experience, use it to illuminate the story of your argument. If you are new to the company, find an advantage in your fresh perspective. What you are doing in each example is exploiting your best against your opponent’s best.

Jujitsu argument may not always work. You may not have a better argument; your opponent may hold the advantage in terms of resources and influence. You would be wiser to wait for another day. Likewise you may not want to use it against your boss’s boss in an open meeting. If you disagree with her, then do it behind closed doors, but only after you have your boss’s blessing?

Leveraging an opponent’s strength is a time-honored tradition. It not only demonstrates your cleverness; it points out your ability to think quickly and carefully. What’s more, it is valuable when challenging assumptions, especially those that underscore the status quo. Raising objections to what everyone assumes is the right course challenges others to reconsider. Perhaps they are right, but perhaps not. Better to consider a counter argument than plunge headlong into a project that may be doomed to fail.

Marian Hossa left at least $28 million – maybe much more – on the table for one simple reason. “I [am] looking for the best place to win the Stanley Cup.” A standout forward with the Pittsburgh Penguins, Hossa opted to sign a one year contract for $7.45 million with the Detroit Red Wings, rather than sign a report five-year deal for $35 million with the Penguins.

What Hossa’s deal provides one more data point in an ocean of evidence that people work for recognition more than a paycheck. Hossa is well-paid regardless but what matters most to the veteran is the opportunity to have his name engraved on the Stanley Cup, the trophy that goes to the NHL champions. There is something else that Hossa illustrates; he likes a big challenge. Creating suitable challenges is a terrific way for managers to motivate their teams. Here are some suggestions.

Make it big. Built to Last by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras taught us the importance of creating “big hairy audacious goals.” Employees like to contribute to something better than themselves. The quest to be the first to market, the best in quality, or the fastest on delivery can be more than words; they can be badges of pride that employees strive to achieve.

Make it feasible. Big is better, yes, but it must be doable. Say you work for a hospital and the leadership team says it wants to become a center of excellence for orthopedics. You mobilize resources, and even facilities, to deliver on that goal. If you have the right mix of surgeons, staff and facilities – coupled with solid management – it could be possible. On the other hand, if the hospital has no reputation, nor orthopedic staff, then the goal is a pipe dream and will turn people off rather than get them on board. Feasibility is essential to motivating people toward a goal.

Make it accessible. People want to feel they can contribute. One of the reasons that Toyota has succeeded so well over the past twenty years is that the company is that employees know what they must do to achieve the corporate vision and strategies. It will be interesting, now that Toyota is mired in the auto industry slowdown, how they tweak their strategies and mobilize their people to get on board once again. My bet is Toyota will find a way by making people involved.

Managers need to keep in mind that not everyone is equally motivated by the same challenges. That is why Marion Hossa’s example makes headlines. Most professional players sign for more money, not a chance to compete for a title. So compensation is important. Sales teams, for example, are routinely challenged by the spiff, that is the extra incentive that comes from attaining a monthly goal. Spiffs work in a sales culture but not so well in a design or engineering culture; in the latter, people measure their contributions not in terms of quotas but in terms of products and processes developed or problems solved.

The manager’s challenge is to find the right way to pull the right switch to motivate the right person at the right time. Easy to say, but difficult to deliver!

Source:
Larry Lage “Marian Hossa signs with champion Detroit Red Wings” Associated Press 7.02.08