This is an interesting and pertinent topic to me, as many of my clients – some aware, some not – suffer from
the micro-managing malady. Are you micro-managing??
It’s been my experience that micro-managers do so from perceived need. At least in their minds, they feel they have a need for acute attention to detail in one or more functions, or with one or more (or all) members of their staffs.
From my experience, the underlying reasons driving this perceived need come from
real or perceived lack of competency of employee(s)
real or perceived lack of trust, and/or
an overdeveloped personal ego/sense of self-worth.
Realize that most people want to achieve the same results with fewer efforts, and micro-managing takes more effort, not less. The dangers to me are straightforward: in times of economic scrutiny, we need employees to be thinking more, not less.
So, how can we tell if we’ve crossed that line into micro-managing? What do we look for, and what can we do? Some indicators (and suggestions):
You frequently get questions about problems without recommended solutions. Employees–even really good ones–tire of doing the legwork for a micro-manager, so will simply ask questions instead of problem-solving. “What do you want me to do?” is a typical question, and they are essentially absolving themselves of all ownership and accountability. You decide, you own. They screw it up, you own it.
You regularly ask successful employees for status updates. Stop it. They didn’t get there by being an idiot, and you frustrating them isn’t helping. Set priorities and deadlines, and then allow employees room to do as you asked. Status updates, particularly those without major project milestones, are simply a display of distrust.
You’re questioning others’ good decisions. Usually because you would have “done it differently,” or are uncomfortable you weren’t involved in the decision. How about just saying “Good work, thanks…?” Learn to shut up; diarrhea of the mouth is a career limiter anyway…
Eradicating micro-managing is the responsibility of both parties–the staffer being micro-managed, and the manager “doing” the micro-managing.
In my upcoming (tomorrow) newsletter, “At C-Level,” I address this topic in some detail. I’d like to cover some additional points, and since this is my forum, I figured I’d just use this… From leadership and performance perspectives, mediocre performance — particularly among managers or key positions — is certainly a critical situation.
There are three real problems with accepting mediocrity:
First, it slows organizational performance. We know that intuitively, though we frequently feel we can “get past that.” We make processes, even hire people, based on some mediocre log-jam that we seem to accept for no rational reason.
Second, mediocrity breeds mediocrity. In other words, if the prevailing culture accepts substandard efforts (in fact, REWARDS those efforts), then those efforts will continue. A basic tenet of compensation: “That which is rewarded is repeated.” In other words, if bad things don’t come to bad people, you can bet their steadily value-sucking performance will continue.
And third, we cannot even KNOW our capabilities or potential when mediocrity is pervasive in the organization. What we view as a challenge – a ‘stretch goal” – may be child’s play for a high-performing organization, yet we’ve accepted that degree of difficulty as a DIRECT result of our culture of marginal performance. Shame on us — we don’t even have a full grasp of where we could be or how high we could go, merely because we allow mediocrity to add weight to performance scales.
Additionally, mediocrity points to two obvious shortcomings with us in senior leadership:
First, the organization cannot be performing at a significant level with mediocre performers. The financial and productive results, then, are obviously less than the potential. Given today’s scarcity of resources, shame on the organization’s leaders for wasting them this way.
More importantly, the leadership team has proven unable or unwilling to manage performance correctly and effectively for the organization to truly realize its success. We have to ask ourselves, if some members of the leadership team are incapable of eradicating pervasively lackluster performance, what else are they “not” doing? What other gaps do we have, that we may not even realize? How much money has flown through the door unchecked?
Mediocrity, either in terms of absolute performance or at least acquiescence/acceptance, begins at the top.
To borrow from some other cause’s tagline: We can eradicate mediocrity in our lifetimes.
I don’t know how. I don’t think the boss said/meant that.
The list is endless. The bottom line… It’s not my fault!
And therein lies the crux of the problem: Accountability isn’t about blame, it’s about ownership.
We recently conducted a workshop on Leadership Accountability. Powerful, uncomfortable stuff. People squirming in chairs, eyes shifting around, not making eye contact… even being accountable for understanding accountability was difficult.
Damn. How’d we get here?
First, let’s discuss what Accountability is in the leadership context, what it isn’t, and what it looks like when worn correctly.
(These are my definitions, so just bear with me. If you want to use your definitions, write your own article.)
“Leadership Accountability is being responsible for the results of your decisions or actions without demand or force and prepared to explain them when you are asked.
Think OWNERSHIP.
Like owning a car. No one blames you for owning a car (well, some of you may push that a bit), you just own it. If it’s clean, that’s on you. If it runs well, that’s on you. If the oil isn’t changed regularly (you know who you are), that’s on you as well.
In other words, you’re completely accountable for that car. You aren’t to blame for the car, you’re simply accountable.
So, think ownership.
We keep using “responsibility” when discussing Accountability… are they the same thing?
No. Here’s something to chew on to distinguish between Responsibility and Accountability:
Responsibility is taking ownership of activities. A person who completes the tasks required for their job or role is responsible.
Accountability is taking ownership of results. A person who knows what needs to be accomplished and does what it takes to get the right results is accountable.
We’re responsible for tasks, accountable for results. No, that’s not just a play on words, either. It brings us to another point: Accountability is one-deep.
Many people can own responsibilities, but…
Accountability is one-deep
Many managers can be responsible for submitting their numbers to a Director. That director, however, is accountable for that report. If one of those managers doesn’t do their job, that director is still accountable for the report.
Only one person is ultimately accountable for any result, though many may have a responsibility to assist.
Now, just to mess with your head… that same manager may have had an accountability to submit that report, but it’s only an accountability for that manager – the director still has overall accountability for the report.
Things that make you go “hmmmm…”
To further unpack this, we must understand that Accountability doesn’t mean punishment. Accountability is a willingness to accept responsibility for our own actions. We too often use Accountability and “holding someone accountable” as negative events. They aren’t, when done correctly.
First, you own accountability yourself. No one can “hold” you accountable for anything. They can force, coerce or threaten you to get you to do something, our even punish you when you don’t; but remember our definition, being forced doesn’t count.
What we can do, however, is assist others and ask for help ourselves.
We can help others with their accountability by doing what we’re supposed to do, respectfully reminding, and helping out wherever we can.
We can also ask others to help us with our accountabilities. Give people permission to be our eyes, ears, Jiminy Cricket or whatever floats your boat to help us remember and follow through. It’s not forced if you asked for help – it’s simply smart and resourceful.
So, how do we foster better accountability within our hallowed halls? It’s not hard, if we can get past the blaming game…
Clear communications. People know what’s expected and why it’s necessary.
Meaningful Consequences. Focus on positive consequences, negative/punishment is indicative of a failure somewhere. (this will be another article – it’s a big deal)
Model accountability. Leaders set the tone. Speak accountability; demonstrate accountability. “Do as I say, not as I do” simply will not work here.
The “Model Accountability” deserves more info… we model Accountability when we accept and embrace our own Accountability. Words like “I was wrong,” “I made a mistake,” “That’s on me,” and other similar statements imply accountability.
Think about it – openly accepting accountability is generally a positive thing and has a constructive impact on others.
And be prepared to explain why, because that’s how we learn. Use reasons, not excuses. I could write a boring treatise on the difference, but I’ll use my simple mind’s clarification:
Reasons include my action or inaction as the center of the failure,
Excuses use another person, inanimate object or intangible as the center/cause of failure.
Give reasons, not excuses. We all learn, grow, and improve when doing so.
I’ve crammed four workshop hours into this brief article, and those four hours could easily have been two days. Accountability, though simple, has the constant complexity of people’s emotions and fear. Makes for some heady stuff but hoped to give you a brief overview here.
Happy to share more if you like, just ask, comment or complain and we can discuss. As always, you can reach me at kevinb@triangleperformance.com.
And Be Brazen, remembering that Grace and Accountability can coexist.
Though leadership is always my preferred topic, sometimes we need to get into the management weeds. The blocking and tackling that is so necessary for success in leadership is sometimes overlooked for more of the sexy, fun stuff.
It’s important, though. And likely no management concept is more important — or more ignored — than that of appropriate Span of Control.
What’s the perfect number of direct reports? People who report directly to you? How many employees should any one manager have working for them; does it matter what “kinds” of employees?
I get these questions a lot, so thought I’d help shed some light.
This challenge, of course, refers to what’s called Span of Control, and though there are always “unique” circumstances that defeat any rule, there are some decent historical guidelines.
Span of Control isn’t simply dependent on each individual; it’s a basic limitation of all managers as it describes only their direct reports. Though a manager can effectively “control” any number of people if there are enough levels in between, not so when it comes to direct reports. That capacity is finite.
…and here’s the deal: don’t give me this song and dance bullshit about how this doesn’t apply to you, or that you’re somehow different. It does, and you ain’t.
Appropriate span of control refers to those you can effectively and successfully manage, not just have on an org chart. If you have 10+ direct reports, they simply cannot be receiving the individual attention that each one needs. There aren’t enough minutes in the day.
I may not be a math major, but I do own a calculator.
Be Brazen, and remember that Grace and Accountability can coexist.
So, just got that big promotion, eh? Now, you’re “It.” Big Shot. Grand Poobah. Boss Hog. El Jefe. Shiznit. The Big Cheese. Uppity-Muckety-Muck. She who must be obeyed. Kahuna.
Sounds great, right? Finally, you’re a CXO, with all the rights, privileges, honors and benefits occurring thereto.
So I say, Congrats! Finally, you have all that extra money, private elevator, fancy business card and a big, honkin’ corner office… you big LOSER!
Wait, what?? If I have just been promoted, why are you calling me a Loser?? What the hell have I lost?
Funny you should ask. I hate to be a buzz-kill, but you may want to put down that promotion drink for a second. You see, when ascending into senior-most leadership, you do lose some things.
For instance:
You lose the ability to solely determine your success. Your success now depends almost entirely on others’ efforts and successes. Hint: this should be a clear indicator that their success is now your #1 priority.
You have lost the ability to suggest. Unfortunately, at your new lofty stratum, suggestions sound more like orders than random ideas. Surprisingly, nearly all your suggestions will be implemented, post-haste. Complete with “I thought that’s what you wanted.”
You lose the ability to consistently rely on a decision-making safety net. This one is tougher to realize before you’re there. Until in the seat, most of us don’t really understand the comfort we get from having others above us in the food chain to prevent our sheer stupidity from making the 6 o’clock news.
You have lost the ability to hold a grudge. Sure, remember how people perform and behave, but you must now be willing to forgive and forget. Or at a minimum, forgive and empower (again).
You lose the ability to vent outwardly to a crowd. No more temper tantrums when something breaks. Not that you should have been having them before, but…
You lose the ability to have a bad day. At least the ability to display that you’re having a bad day. Your followers need — and have the right to – you at your best.
You have lost the ability to not recognize that whenever your door opens, you’re on stage. The world (as you know it) is always watching; act accordingly.
You lose the ability to be “off-stage” with anyone with the same paycheck. I’m not saying you can’t hang out (though I do advise restraint), but while hanging out remember you’re still on stage. Some things done cannot be undone, nor can things seen be unseen.
Language—you lose the ability to use any of the following phrases:
S/He’ll get over it.
Titles don’t matter.
Just handle it.
Make it go away.
Because I said so.
I can’t deal with that right now.
That’s not the way we did it at XXX Company.
Finally, you have utterly lost the ability to take credit for anything that happens on your watch, unless you were the sole human responsible for every single step of the way. In which case, you’re being paid too much. Don’t feel too bad about this one; you’re still 100% accountable for all of your purview, including the screw-ups, oopsies, and “my bads.”
And yes, yes… before anyone picks one or two of these and comes up with the clever “…but Bill Gates doesn’t have a degree” exception, I do realize that some of these may not be as absolute a prohibition as I’ve described. Let’s agree, however, that overall some of our up-to-now behaviors must go the way of the dodo bird (or cash, customer service or fifty-cent coffee) when we achieve senior-most leadership levels.
This top-10 list isn’t meant to be discouraging or restrictive; it’s simply a fact that “with great power comes great responsibility.” Some of those responsibilities can be displayed as much by what you don’t do, as by what you do.
And take heart… the list of things you get to do is incredible. You get to influence careers and lives; you get to have a personal impact on people and organizations; you get to make meaningful decisions so that others may succeed… there are lots more, but we’ll save them for a sequel article.
Kevin Ross is my best friend and my partner-in-crime at Triangle Performance (how cool is that?) We frequently have discussions on various leadership topics; sometimes over the phone, sometimes via text, sometimes in-person over a cigar (and perhaps a wee dram or two). Makes for an interesting dialog, to say the least.
Recently, we discussed Integrity. We have forever simplified “integrity” to mean “do what you say you’ll do.” And frankly, for a generalized foundational definition, that works well. For more sophisticated, nuanced conversations… well, it sucks.
In looking at leadership from an application standpoint – something we absolutely strive for here – integrity shows up as a factor in so many things. As much as I love simplicity, some things are necessarily complicated. Dammit. I’m none too happy about that, but reality is what it is. You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
So, we’re digging deeper into the reality of integrity. And we realized that integrity can’t be simply telling the truth. “Whaaat??” you say? Let me explain… (finally get to use my Princess Bride reference…)
You see, there’s more to integrity than simple honesty.
So, time for a new definition. Integrity, it seems to me, is simply demonstrable moral courage. I’m still keeping it simple, but for leaders, it involves more than simple honesty. It includes honesty to self—the courage of your convictions. I’ve used courage now twice in describing integrity, so you word-counters must know it’s important. It is. Our folks want to see us leading… from the front… even when it hurts.
The hurting that you feel? It’s just demonstrable courage bursting through. And no worries, it only hurts the first time or two; after that, you get used to it. Like scotch, it’s an acquired taste.
Soon, we’ll do an entire newsletter devoted to courage (it’ll hurt a bit, trust me). Until then, if you’re trying to figure out how you can demonstrate moral courage today (remember, we’re all about applying things, not just theory):
Be transparent. This means, of course, being honest. It also means providing insight into the sausage-making we call decisions, and helping people understand why we do what we do. The “why” is the singular most important piece of delegation, empowerment and change. It’s only right that it be a cornerstone in our newfound courageous behavior.
Be accountable. When you screw up (note the “when,” not “if”), apologize, sincerely and without qualification. Show remorse and commit to do better. Then shut up and move on. Take complete ownership of all you do, good and bad. Take your share of ownership of more corporate decisions, even (especially?!) if you disagree with them.
Be responsible for results. Take inputs, listen to them closely, and change course if that’s the right thing to do. Don’t stay hooked to a course that was wrong from the beginning. However, If your first decision – even with your new knowledge – is still correct, own that as well. Tell them you’ve considered their inputs, but for whatever reason (insert here), you’ve decided to continue that course. Your job is to listen to inputs, consider available options, and discern among options. Own it, do it, make sure others see it.
Integrity is an important leadership competence (I know… “D’oh!”), but learning how to demonstrate that competence is what matters. People have to actually see us doing what they need and expect—it’s not enough for you to just know it.
Here endeth the lesson (another great movie line)…
an accountability to submit that report, but it’s only an accountability for that manager – the director still has overall accountability for the report.
