“He says you’re a nightmare,” my boss told me.
I’d just been promoted to editor-in-chief of our publication — my first position where I truly had management responsibilities — and the initial reports from my staff (at least one member) were not good.
“Well, he’s not taking his job seriously,” I barked back. “His stuff is full of errors — it’s like he doesn’t even care.”
My boss, a guy I’m still friends with to this day, seemed to have the perfect feel for dealing with me in this situation — much like an experienced parent dealing with a rebellious teen.
“Listen,” he said. “Just take it easy. You’ve got to figure out how to get him to want to do better, you can’t force it and you can’t be a bully.”
Yeah, yeah, I thought, too defensive at the moment to appreciate his words. But, as I’m prone to do, those words did sit on the surface of my brain like water on a dry riverbed. And much like that, they finally seeped into the dense tissues. So, after time, I began backing off, became more pleasant, less dictatorial, and the results were amazing. After a few months, the relationship between this individual and I were excellent. I had come not only to admire, but to truly value, his work. I had learned that the first step to leadership, to management, is laying off and letting go.
And though that incident took place many moons ago, I can still, today, say that almost every time I feel I’ve grown as a manager or leader, it’s because I’ve let go of a process or further empowered a member of our team.
“I think you know how I generally feel about it, so don’t worry about checking with me — just do your thing,” I’ll say.
Of course, every organization must operate under some type of parameters, some type of system — “we do this and we don’t do that.” But, after you’ve hired great people (and practicing enlightened management is impossible without this prerequisite), these parameters should be as loose as possible. Think of those talented folks as master chefs — they need room in which to operate, to express themselves, to exercise their judgment and to add their own flavor to the dishes you’ve put on the menu. Without this level of autonomy, great people will become stultified, bored and disengaged.
You know this to be true if you’re working for such a flawed manager.
Of course, the beauty of this reality is that, once embraced, you’ve freed yourself to work on leadership and management-level things — those things you’re supposed to be doing. You’ve taken away the redundancy and inefficiencies associated with delegating things and then overseeing them to the point you might as well have done them yourself. You are now getting the most out of your folks, they are happy, and you can get the most out of yourself.
The best leaders in history have had the knack of getting the right folks in the right positions and then providing each one with just the right level of guidance and oversight for that particular person — the Goldilocks approach to management. But I don’t think that these leaders knew the right level for each individual without some trial and error. And just like a marriage (despite the erroneous concept of a honeymoon phase), the most vibrant and productive parts of a manager/employee relationship come after the adjustment time, after that hard initial phase when each is learning the others proclivities, quirks, limits and tolerances. Of course, this familiarity can only come if you avoid quick divorce (staff turnover).
So if you’re having challenges on the management front, try giving more rope instead of the instinctual response to rein in. Make sure the individual knows where you’re coming from, and if at all possible, widen their scope of movement. Remember, if they’ve got something on the ball, give them every opportunity to come around, to soak up what you’re saying, give them a second chance.
I’m glad my old boss did.
Share Your Thoughts
You must be logged in to post a comment.