Managers - Unfair burden?

[Mike Healy]

Its quite common for managers to be seen as "the problem" when it comes to lack of employee engagement. We are happy to provide all sorts of advice and models which, if the line manager only followed diligently, would result in higher levels of engagement.

I think we need to spare a thought for the manager who is asked to take on responsibility for so many things: cost control, profit maximisation, delivery schedules, customer complaints.........the list is endless. It is hardly surprising that they are not engaging employees as well as they should. They have a whole range of problems they also need to deal with.

Maybe we should think more carefully about how we ( who offer advice on employee engagement) engage with managers so that they can engage with others. How do we help them deal with the myriad of problems they face ........one of which is employee engagement.........so that they can become better at EE

This story often helps me remember that others don't see the world the way I see it.

There was once a woodcutter who was busy cutting down trees. He was observed by an expert from a far away hill. After observing him for some time the expert suggested that the wood cutter should stop after every third tree to sharpen his axe. If he did this he would cut down more trees per day and he woudln't be so tired at the end of the day. The wood cutter replied that he had no time for this as he was too busy cutting down trees.

Here we can see the dilemma of both the "expert" and the woodcutter. One sees a solution but can't engage the other who doesn't see any value in the proposed solution or can't break out of their current approach to meet targets.

So maybe WE need to think more about how to engage with line managers to make the changes happen rather than present them with a theory , concept, process or piece of research on EE and hope that they will just get on with it.

[Terrence Seamon]

Good post, Mike.

Remember the old saying "There is no 'I' in TEAM"? Meaning that for a team to succeed, it can't be about the individual. Rather it has to be about the group, the team, and its goal.

Well, the same goes for a manager. There is no 'I' in MANAGER. Meaning that for a Manager and his or her team to succeed, it can't be about the Manager. Rather, it has to be about the team and its goal.

The dilemma for many Managers, however, is that they are caught up in a host of "Me Issues." It's quite understandable, given the many pressures on them (that you point out, Mike).

How do we help Managers get over themselves and their self-interest so that they can focus on their people (i.e. their team and their customers)?

Terry

[Chris Bailey]

I like where you're heading with this Terry...if a manager believes that they alone are responsible for cost cutting, customer satisfaction, profit max, they're assuming far too much of the burden and are destined to get mired in the weeds. I've asked managers why they don't pass some of this responsibility down to individuals on their team - individuals who want to grow in areas such as these. When they do this, they unload some of the burdens of their business and they engage their employees.

And it's in the answers that they sometimes offer that these "me issues" surface...What if the employee does a better job at it than I do? Or conversely, what if they really screw things up and I then have to clean the mess?

I think the absolutely worst thing a consultant can do is come in and try to change things without bothering to spend the time to understand the possible resistances to change. There's a darn good reason the woodcutter wasn't going to change his ways...the expert has to work with what he or she is given.

[Vijay Kumar Shrotryia]

I fully agree to what you mention regarding engaging employess by making them responsible...and sharing responsibility.....After all organizations are not just for managers.....

[Mike Healy]

Thanks Terry and Chris

I agree that managers may have "Me Issues" which prevent team work and EE.

So having established that they have their own blockages we need to help them build a mindset and attitude that is more approriate. They maybe need to trust people more, take criticism less personally, don't fear failure so much or be more assertive with those above them ( and below them).

If we view EE the concept as the song, there are many who will debate the the best way to write/compose the song. We have seen this on this site where people debate the EE concept itself. However, a song is often made great or poor by the singer of the song. Managers need to learn to sing the EE song but they may not be natural singers or may believe their interests and talents lie elswewhere and are rewarded for being good at those and not for being good at EE.

Somehow or other we need to help managers ( and those who reward them) view EE as of equal if not greater importance than their other tasks.. Then we need to teach them how to fit it in to their day to day workload and become adept at doing it.

Mike

[Jennifer Schulte]

Hi Mike,
Just throwing in my 2 cents on your latest comment to agree with you. Often the biggest complaint is time - not having enough of it to focus on engagement. But the managers who use their time for engagement actually get more done, through their teams vs. trying to have all the answers themselves.

I've also observed managers who are naturally talented at engagement, but their boss does not value it / is not good at it, so there is unnecessary pressure on them to change for the worse! It is difficult when leaders do not embrace and role model engaging behaviors - then it's really unfair to expect front line managers to do it well. If a manager is engaging, but not engaged themselves, the true power for the business is lost. The team may benefit but there is not much in the way of reward or recognition to the manager.

Teams like this can benefit if they keep at it ... changing the world one workgroup at a time...but it makes for a much slower (and more painful!) process. Starting at the top makes a huge difference in the general engagement culture down to every level.

[John Kmiec]

Its never really one thing, is it?

Gallup's extensively researched Q12, by its very nature, seems to put the lions' share of the responsibility on management, especially immediate supervisors:

Gallup Consulting
Employee engagement
2008
http://www.gallup.com/consulting/52/Employee-Engagement.aspx

John Thackray
Feedback for real
March 15, 2004
Gallup Management Journal [on-line]
http://gmj.gallup.com/content/811/Feedback-Real.aspx

Susan Ellingwood
The right stuff
Gallup Management Journal; Spring2002, Vol. 2 Issue 1, p1, 3p

And other's, like W. Edwards Deming, also saw good paople in bad systems that only management had the power to fix (see http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/pub/den/deming_philosophy.htm).

But, others see a more dynamic world... for instance, whose to say a lack of "in-demand" skills in the workforce to compete in an increasingly dynamic, global economy isn't a major contributor in some industries? (see http://www.doleta.gov/whatsnew/Derocco_speeches/2007-10-12.cfm)

My point is that I would be shocked to see a single smoking gun either breaking or fixing the state of engagement across the board. On the other hand, there may be a set of priorities that can be impacted at the organizational and workgroup levels that can make a positive difference.

[Vijay Kumar Shrotryia]

Engagement needs to be coming through the sense of empowerment flowing down from managers (decision-makters) to its employees in general. Classical management theories of control would not hold true in the modern organizations. Hence the sense of responsibility and not merely participation in decisions but accountability for the decisions should take care of better Engagement culture in the organizations.....