We've all had them. Managers and bosses that were just really bad at managing staff. Their unrealistic demands, seemingly uninformed decisions, and company policy changes that don't seem to make any sense yet somehow have to be taken seriously.
What gives? How did they even get promoted, only to seem so totally out of touch with the team that reports to them?
Not only that, how do we fix it?
First, let's ask:
What do managers even do, anyway?
No matter what level of management or type of company, there are seven duties that all managers tend to have in common:
Managing employee performance.
Guiding subordinates.
Representing one’s staff.
Managing team performance.
Allocating resources.
Coordinating interdependent groups.
Monitoring the business environment.
With that in mind, companies select the wrong fit for management 82% of the time.
Eighty-two percent.
Let that sink in.
82% of management hires are bad decisions.
It sounds made up, but that is the number according to a Gallup Poll
where Jim Clifton, Gallup chairman and CEO himself states:
“Organizations fail to choose the candidate with the right talent for the manager job a whopping 82% of the time. Virtually all companies try to fix bad managers with training. Nothing fixes a bad manager."
It's true, nothing does. I've seen it myself while in various roles over the years, from coffee shop to consulting firm.
82%! How does this happen?
I'll give you two examples, see if these sound familiar at all to you:
Hey, Bob! For the past six months, you've consistently sold more widgets than anyone else in the entire office. Congratulations, you're the new manager!
Hey there, Sally. You've been here for five years now. Congratulations, you're the new manager!
Typically, new management promotions are down to either previous success in a non-managerial capacity or experience/tenure with the company.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with either of these. After all, it is the employee's skills and experience that earned them the promotion in the first place.
The problem is that employee's skill and experience in a non-managerial role does not necessarily make that employee management material.
With one out of two employees leaving in order to get away from the manager, something is definitely wrong.
Okay, so what does make a great manager?
Talent.
Not once did I believe that. I always thought it was a lack of training that made bad managers, companies too cheap or shortsighted to see the value in effective management training. Certainly, if candidates had the right training, there would be no problem, right?
MBAs learn quite a bit about management during the course of their studies. By that reasoning, an MBA would make a good manager. At least, a better manager than one without any training, right?
So I thought, until I did have MBAs as managers. Ivy league school MBAs, Harvard, Stanford, Cornell. They admittedly were not good managers. At all. They had no talent for it.
They were really awesome in Excel though.
What do you mean by "talent"?
Gallup defines managerial talent as having 5 dimensions:
Motivator
Assertiveness
Accountability
Relationships
Decision-Making
Only one in ten employees is talented across all five dimensions.
The key is identifying and promoting these employees. One way this can be achieved is through Management Potential testing.
The right manager will motivate, focus on employee's individual strengths, achieve results, and build strong relationships through trust and accountability.
Creating a culture of engagement through great communication creates engaged employees, where the opposite is true with disengaged managers.
What do you mean by "engagement"?
Engagement is defined as being enthusiastic, involved, and committed. Highly engaged managers means highly engaged employees.
It probably doesn't help much to know this if your manager does in fact suck. At least now you have legitimate research into why that likely is.
Now that we know, will companies make use of this research, recognize and invest in talent to increase their competitive advantage?
