Category: Management


Mourinho directs his troops

Image, ‘Mourinho directs his troops’ copyright Flickr user Ronnie McDonald. Used under Creative Commons.

As a Chelsea supporter the team’s poor start to the Premier League season has been hard to watch.  Having won the Premier League title last season, this season the team stands at 15 out of 20 teams – something unheard of for a team of generally used to be in the Top 3.  They keep on losing and losing badly and the normal action of owners in the premier league when a team’s performance declines precipitously has been to fire the manager.

How things play out in the next month at Chelsea will determine how it will go for the next five years.

A common problem

As somebody who coaches CEOs on both leadership and management the challenges facing the club are commonplace within large organizations.  CEOs have big plans which they expect their managers to deliver.  Abramovich’s vision for the club is one of long-term domination of the game. He has also stated that they must achieve a Top 4 standing in this years league in order to be eligible for the Champions League Tournament the prestigious European Knockout competition for the top clubs.

As in many large organizations the problem is largely one of differing expectations and unclear accountabilities – the vision determines how managers manage, rather than management successes being seen as a means to the long-term vision and when things don’t go to plan the Chief Executive applies pressure on managers to perform, rather than trusting in the talent and creating an environment, in which they can do their best work.

This environment cannot be created while the threat of being shown the door hangs over every performance. Abramovich has demonstrated leadership and set to rest any suggestion that Mourinho’s future at the club is in doubt – at least in the short-term.  He then needs to allow his manager to manage the talent available to him in order to deliver both the short-term league success and the owner’s long-term vision.

Blame the manager

Chelsea have had 11 managers in as many years.  The Club’s board has never seemed to take a long term view and as a result appears despite the huge capital investments made in talented players, is incapable of building an organization with the long term potential to become a world class soccer club – a force to be reckoned with. Does Abramovich support a culture of deliver or die or does he create a culture that enables his manager – a manager with a huge track record of success and is loved by all the Chelsea fans – to be given space to address the challenges of his under performing players.

Chelsea Football Club is a business.  A large business with major capital investments.  Its employees need consistency and stability to deliver results.  Abramovich needs to ensure that the “current storm of losses” can be managed through.  His employees need consistency, stability and clarity if they are going to deliver results.  The last thing he should do now is throw his manager overboard.  He does that and yet again any possibility to build and implement a long term strategy is ashes.

Having done this the confidence this will be achieved, of both the manager and his players, should improve.  As a result, the on-field performances are likely to improve and.  This was unlikely while there was a question over Mourinho’s future.

I think this is the right decision.

Leadership & Management

Solving the problem at Chelsea requires both leadership and management. It requires Abramovich and Mourinho to work together, rather than independently. Turning things around on the pitch needs to be Mourinho’s accountability.  Creating a culture that allows him to do it requires Abramovich to demonstrate leadership.

 

A key first step to managing large groups is to be clear on your strategy and be able to quote your Vision and Mission statement from memory. When talking with a group of 25 CEOs last week about how to manage large groups of employees a considerable number of these CEO’s,  to my surprise, could not do this.
I did not expect managers at this level to fail in this exercise.  But am I being naive? How many senior executives have their Vision and Mission statements memorized cold? How many are able to refer to it mentally as a guiding reference for all they do on a day-to-day basis?

The problem is many senior leaders regard their Vision and Mission as window dressing – something they need to have but do not really value.  Take some time to read a few: many are excruciatingly obtuse.  Yet these are the two statements
that are supposed to give context and direction (what businesses we can and cannot be in) for everything done in a company to achieve the strategy.  The apparent failure of CEOs and senior managers to know their Vision and Mission off pat could explain the poor performance of many household brand companies.

I think I stumbled on a real opportunity to improve alignment and corporate performance.  Knowing and understanding the Vision and Mission is the accountability of every manager in the organization.

Have you committed your Vision and Mission to memory?  What about your senior executive team? What role does it play in helping you manage large groups of employees?

Share your Vision and Mission below and I’ll send you a condensed version of How Dare You Manage? 7 Principles Every CEO Needs for Managing Large Groups of Employees.

Last week I read about the sad findings in Gallop’s most recent “State of the
American Manager” Report.  It’s an interesting – if depressing – read.  It got me thinking about the core skills of
management talent.   These are:

* Motivator
* Assertiveness
* Accountability
* Relationships
* Decision Making

According to the report, the majority of managers fail every one.  On the face
of it they do not look that complicated, so let’s examine them and try and see
where most managers are going wrong.

1. Motivator:  They challenge themselves and their teams to continually improve
and deliver distinguished performance.

You’d think that this capability should be found in most management candidates.
It is not hard to see if someone is interested in accomplishment and
improvement.  Just look at their past history and how they have improved
themselves.

2. Assertiveness: They overcome challenges, adversities and resistance.

Have you put someone in a role where they will be overwhelmed?  How big are they
for the role?  You need someone who can get the arms around their management
role.  If they feel overwhelmed they will find it hard to be assertive.

The choice to put them in a role is the sum of their manager’s discretion.
Often this discretion gets undermined by weak objective measurements that
enable shoddy thinking and poor choices.

3. Accountability:  They ultimately assume responsibility for their teams ‘
success and create the structure and processes to help their teams deliver on
expectations.

If you hold a manager accountable for the outputs of their employees you will
get the above.  There can be no “Teflon Management” if a manager is held
accountable for their team’s output.  “There is nobody else to blame for poor
performance so I had better get on with building the best team I can and support
them with the required structure and processes”

4. Relationships:  They build a positive, engaging work environment where their
teams create strong relationships with one another and clients.

All of us know and can judge if someone can build relationships.  How dare you
put managers in charge of people when they don’t like people!!!!   It just a
fundamentally flawed decision that builds dark satanic mills – awful places to
work.  It is unconscionable act of lousy management

5.Decision-Making:  They solve the many complex issues and problems inherent to
the role of thinking ahead, planning contingencies, balancing competing interest
and taking an analytical approach.

They need a brain to do this!  Do not put a manager in a role who is not capable
of handling the complexity the work.  They will be overwhelmed, unable to sort
things out and delegate effectively to their employees.  These employees will
also work out quickly that their manager is “too stupid” for the role and cannot
help or team them much if anything.  It raises the odds of them disengaging from
their work pretty fast.

The truth is that none of this matters much unless the CEO and their Executive
really engage and care about structuring work of their company and staffing it
with right management capability and holding them accountable for effective
performance.  And, while the five dimensions of effective management might
appear common sense, Gallup says that in a whopping 82 percent of cases
organizations choose fail to choose the candidate with the right talent for the
manager job.

This is an abdication of CEO Management.  It is a shame and creates a wasteland
of human talent as described by Gallop in their 2015 report. The sad fact is
that as ill equipped most managers in large organizations are, it starts with a
basic CEO skills gap.

Closing that gap MUST be the priority for the majority of large organizations.

If you’re a manager Gallup’s latest “State of the American Manager” is painful
reading. Our profession is full of incompetent, overwhelmed managers who do not
care for the role they have chosen. As a result, they inflict pain and
suffering on those they are supposed to be managing. Only 35% of managers
are engaged, 51% are not engaged and 14% are actively disengaged.

In his introduction Gallup CEO Jim Clifton pulls no punches. “Most CEO’s I know
don’t care about their employees or take and interest in Human Resources”.  This
disinterest and disengagement costs the US economy $319 billion per year.

The report states that their research showed 1 in 2 – HALF of US employees left
their job to get away from their manager and improve their personal life at some
point in their career.  I can testify to that – it happened to me twice in my
early career. The report says that just 30% of workers are engaged in their
work and connected to their company.

I believe all employees have right when hired by a company to be given work that
grows their self-confidence and feeling of self worth. This is a common sense
and win-win for both the employee and the company. But, it requires managers
pay attention to their employees, manage them with respect, give them work that
interests them and enable them to learn and grow they will get higher levels of
engagement and quality of work.  It requires a framework for managers to acquire
the skills they need to manage large groups of people effectively.

The opportunity for improvement is massive. What CEO’s and their executives
think their management work is I do not know, but Gallup’s report suggests they
need to find out. And quickly!

This is a question I have asked hundreds of Chief Executives over the years. I’m always fascinated to hear how they describe CEO work.  Most can’t answer this question succinctly or clearly.  Many have “bits” of an answer. Few could describe a comprehensive integrated management process that can be communicated in a comprehensive manner to their senior executive team.

Another question I’ve asked repeatedly over the years is, “what is the difference between leadership and management?”.  It leaves most floundering. Many have been chief executive officers of large organizations for many years, managing thousands of employees, but the majority have clearly not taken much time to consider the difference.  These CEOs end up being neither a manager or a leader, to the detriment of their own personal performance and that of the organizations they spearhead.

Their failure to differentiate between leadership and management also means they cannot define clear expectations for either.  Predictably, without clear definitions, their senior executives manage inconsistently.  This, in turn, leads to a lack of clarity for front-line managers and employees.  It ends up becoming a vicious circle.

The problem is that when you take on the management mantle of CEO of a company, the assumption is that you have all of the skills necessary to do the job.  As the chief executive of an organization it is assumed that you have the training and experience to help your organization fly with the same level of confidence and expertise a 747 pilot sitting on the runway with a fully loaded plane of passengers preparing to take off. The reality is often very different!

A 747 pilot is prepared for the job.  They’ve gone through a process that, to reference Malcolm Gladwell, has involved thousands of hours of practical experience. They will also have piloted the plane as First Officer under the tutelage of the Captain on many occasions.  A new CEO, on the other hand, often has not had the hours of job-specific training, nor the extensive study of the theory, principles and processes they need to effectively manage a large group of employees.

Many CEOs also take over accountability for their ‘aircraft’ in mid-flight! They often take over when something has gone wrong, usually something serious.  Yet, they are then expected to diagnose the problem, fix it, file a new flight plan, change heading and land safely – often at a destination that was different from the intended one. They are expected to do all this while learning how to fly a plane they’ve never flown before.

Thank heavens a company never leaves the ground!

From my experience, part of the success of a new CEO is the ability to provide their managers with a philosophy, a set of principles, processes and disciplines, and demand they practice them to an exemplary standard with clear accountability. It is the only way to attain a level of performance within their organization that enables everybody to perform to their best work.

I define this process as the Craft of CEO Management.  A Craft, since the Middle Ages, has been the lifelong pursuit of mastery in a chosen profession. For chief executive officers the profession is CEO management. It presents an opportunity to choose a management philosophy, structure, set of principles, processes and disciplines and then practice using them for the rest of their career.

A Chief Executive must strive to be a master the Craft of CEO Management.  Mastery of the Craft represents the single greatest great opportunity for performance improvement for senior executives.  Those who take on the challenge; reflect on it; learn from it; and integrate all the management work of their company achieve higher levels of engagement and better results.

Those CEOs who avoid this essential management work are unable to execute their duties to the best of their capability.  The performance of their organizations suffers because they are unable to get the best out of the hundreds of employees they manage.

So, do you dare to master the Craft of CEO Management? Which philosophy will you choose?

Nick Forrest

Most companies suffer from a surfeit of leadership. What they need is management to ensure things get done. I mentioned this when talking to a group of senior managers recently who are accountable for the work of 2500 employees and received quite an energetic reaction.

I explained that this is because most managers have been told to lead their division or team. But to start with, most managers cannot define the difference between leadership and management. Leadership work is creating the company’s/department’s vision for the way ahead and engaging and enlisting their employees to help build this future. Management is the design and management of their employees’ environment to maximize their capability  to do their best work. Managers need to do both.

Leaders often don’t roll up their sleeves to do the slogging work of management.  They make a lot of noise but nothing comes down the stairs!  Nothing significant really changes to their employees immediate environment to enable employees to work more effectively and efficiently within the system they find themselves.

I believe that leaders who only focus on inspiring great work are not as successful as those managers who focus their efforts on helping their employees achieve the great work that they want to accomplish. Senior executives need to sharpen their senses to identify what prevents employees doing their best work. They need to be experts as removing these barriers.

Most of us arrive at work eager to contribute, create and be part of something successful. If our senior managers are effective, we will be able to continue with that enthusiasm and get our work done. Yes, I hold the top of house accountable for everything an employee experiences. For example, it is senior managers’ accountability to ensure that every employee is managed by a manager who will treat them with respect and can teach them and enhance their skills and confidence. To do this is not an act of leadership – it is an act of management. To make this happen will require the installation of company-wide assessment systems, frequent and truthful review of managers’ performance. To ensure fairness, all employees require clear goals and measurements against which they can be assessed. Removal from role will happen quite frequently at the onset of this process. These are the nitty-gritty tough aspects of management to get things done right in the company!

Leadership is often not the answer to solving the pain in a company. It requires management.

 

In the past decade management gurus and the media have advocated that the “secret sauce” to success lies in becoming a leader not a manager.

Management has almost become a dirty word despite the fact that management is the essential component of delivering any leader’s vision. (See my blog defining leadership and management).  The net result of all this is leadership is now regarded as more sexy and seductive than management; more senior executives aspire to be leaders than managers.  This misconception comes at a significant loss in corporate performance.

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Jos Wintermans, the former CEO of Canadian Tire Acceptance Limited. Jos has successfully led more than a dozen companies during his career.  He likened leadership to a “Mars Bar” – providing a spike of energy or enthusiasm to embolden employees but it fails to sustain in longer term.  He explained that as the impact of leadership fades, so does the enthusiasm and energy within an organization. Management, he explained, is the discipline that sustains energy and enthusiasm within an organization.  It ensures that employees remain engaged, focused and energized and always able to do their best work.

I am not saying that leadership is unimportant.  Leaders point the way forward and describe the road ahead with energy that engages employees. But, after this rhetoric has faded the real hard work of implementation and execution of the plan starts.  It’s all about management.

I believe all CEOs have to face, and understand, that the higher you rise in an organization and the more employees you manage, the more management matters.  Management for chief executives – what I describe as CEO Management – enables you to best utilize every resource at your disposal in order for your organization to achieve its stated goals.  Let me go back to Jos’s comment about Mars Bars.  To effectively prevent the initial enthusiasm and energy from failing, CEOs need to identify the obstacles that hinder their employees’ effectiveness and then implement the required management systems to overcome them.

In the long term employees do not really care how charismatic you are as a leader.  They care about their immediate work environment and their ability to get their work done.  Fix their immediate challenges for them – the job of management – and you will have highly engaged employees.

There exist CEOs who strut up and down the auditorium stage telling their employees what a wonderful future they have and how new systems will enable them to do more with less… but then ignore the critical work of managing their business. Nothing will change in the immediate world of work for their employees.  The same challenges will remain that prevent them doing their best work, and employees will start to disconnect from the strategic plan, as management clearly do not intend on addressing the issues that compromise their ability to do good work and succeed.

Ignoring the management of your business is in effect implementing a long-term employee disengagement strategy!  What steps will you take today to improve your organization’s performance?

Nick Forrest