Abdicating, Controlling And Interfering
As a manager or
leader, we often have to judge how much we need to “manage” our team to ensure people
perform at their best and that our “product” exceeds customer demands.
It’s a fine line deciding how much you need to be
“there”. As a manager, you're answerable
for people and performance. What I’ve
found over the years is that different people need to be managed in different
ways. Some are great left to get on with
things by themselves and produce fantastic results. Others need closer attention.
What I’ve seen too often is the manager who can't
distinguish between:
Abdicating:
This style means that the manager completely lets go. The phrase used is “I trust my people to get
on with it.” As long as he/she has
communicated clearly what their goal is, how they’re expected to reach it, what
resources they can rely on and what to do in case of problems, this may
work. It takes a good leader to train up
their people and to master the art of communication in such a way that they can
literally leave them to “get on with it”.
Too often one sees leaders abandoning their team to fend for themselves,
with potentially disastrous consequences.
Controlling:
This is the “Happy Medium”.
The manager’s in control, but not interfering. He/she knows what’s going on, at what stage
the project is, what the issues are and the measures being taken to resolve any
problems. The team feels that they’re
free to act within prescribed limits and that, if there’s a problem, they can
go for help.
Interfering:
The extreme of “controlling” and polar opposite of “abdicating”
where the leader decides that they must be intimately involved in every process
or detail. Often known as
“micro-managing”, this situation sees the team feeling that their leader is
constantly breathing down their neck and that they have no room for
initiative. A feeling of not being
trusted or that the leader lacks confidence in their abilities is the norm.
In the end, it boils down to:
- The sensitivity or importance of the task at hand;
- The knowledge, experience and problem-solving skills of your people;
- How you delegate;
- Your understanding that, whatever happens, you remain accountable for the outcome.
The word “accountable” means “answerable for”. Many people take time to understand that, just
because they delegate responsibility,
they don't delegate accountability. The abdicator is usually most guilty of this,
whilst the interfering leader keeps the responsibility for the task in hand.
The happy medium is to ensure that people are trained in
their role and in problem-solving within their abilities. Some will develop faster than others (the
“high flyers”), but it doesn't mean that the rest need an “interfering”
leadership style, just they they haven’t yet reached the independence stage as
quickly as others.
Labels: Career, Leadership, Teamwork
posted by William Martin @ 16:43
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home