There is no doubt that there is a great deal of pressure placed on achieving results, and it is necessary to focus on results if the organization is going to meet all of its financial obligations. We want our paychecks on time. Suppliers want to be reimbursed on time. The various levels of government also want their share. So it becomes important for managers to scrutinize work methods in relation to effectiveness and efficiency. New tools are available but we need to make sure we’re using the right tools and learn how to use them and not abuse them.
Work has taken on new dimensions. Secretaries are generally available only at the executive level. Other high-income professionals hunt and peck and click and drag. Everyone has a terminal with unlimited access. E-mail communication often takes precedence over face-to-face communication, even when the people are within ten feet of each other. Much of the information people view is useless or at least not related to the job. Too much emphasis is placed on precision when precision isn’t required. I have always been astounded at what happens during financial reviews. A simple question is asked about the percentage of some figure in the spreadsheet and all the calculators start clicking. Somehow the ability to make mental calculations no longer exists.
Did anyone ever teach you how to work? Probably not. Many years ago I found an after-school job painting storm sashes. I had painted storm sashes at home many times and considered myself qualified. I achieved my first day’s quota and went home to do the usual school homework. When I returned the next day, I was greeted with a very cool reception from the owner. He introduced me to a razor blade and suggested that I remove all the excess paint from my previous day’s work. He noted that I would not be paid for this work. So for over three hours I painstakingly removed all the excess paint without damaging the putty glazing. When I finished the owner, acting as a teacher and coach, taught me how to paint storm sashes like a professional.
The owner first showed me how to dip the paintbrush to the right depth in the pan containing the paint, remove the excess, and then carefully apply it at the correct angle without getting it on the glass. He did this several times. But this was not the end of the lesson. He then took my hand in his and repeated the whole process several times. He went through this motion several times and then gave me an opportunity to try my hand. He continued working with me until I mastered the art of painting a storm sash without any need for cleanup. This is what you call teaching. After this lesson I never had to scrape paint off the glass. I not only improved my productivity but also actually enjoyed painting. I became a pro at it.
That experience taught me a lesson that I’ve leveraged throughout my career. There are managers who espouse the approach of setting objectives and then getting out of the way so people can do the job in whatever way they want as long as they meet the objectives. But this approach only works when people have the required competencies, skills, and attitudes to meet the requirements. As a manager you have a responsibility to teach, and if you don’t have the required skill to do so, then find someone who does.
While my earlier example about painting sashes demonstrates what occurs in developing manual skills, the same principles apply to developing professional skills. Assume that you’re a manager and you have been asked to submit a proposal for some new work. After some thought you decide to give the responsibility to Mike; although he is a relatively new person in the department, he should be able to handle the assignment. You decide that this project would provide some new opportunities for Mike and test his competence in developing a response to the proposal independently. You and Mike have a meeting to go over the relevant details to make sure that both of you are fully aware of the proposal requirements and the timing. You give Mike a briefing of the proposal and an opportunity to ask questions and raise any issues that need clarification. In essence you think you have an understanding and an agreement on the objectives and the timing for completing the task. Your management philosophy follows the practice: Tell them what you want and then get out of the way.
In the intervening weeks, you did not have any specific conversations with Mike about the proposal except the casual, "How’s it going, Mike?" And of course Mike answered, "Great." However, after Mike presented a draft of the proposal, you found out that each of you had a different meaning for the word great. You read the proposal, and you’re disappointed with what Mike presented. So you ask Mike to come in and review the proposal. You really don’t think much of the effort. It’s just more of the same. There’s no forward thinking about the proposal’s topic. What will you say to Mike? Will you face up to the problem and tell Mike about your concerns? Will you have the courage to take the direct route and level with Mike about your disappointment or will you take the indirect route? Will you be forthright with Mike and tell him that this is not what you expected and why you’re disappointed? Will you challenge Mike to justify his methodology and his conclusions during your dialogue? Will this session be a critique or an opportunity to teach Mike what it takes to develop a proposal? The questions asked should not involve destroying Mike’s confidence and your trust. Just stay with the facts and be specific about your concerns.
Two questions should arise from your interchange with Mike. First, why didn’t you sit down with Mike in the first place and lay out a more detailed plan? Not necessarily timelines, but items to be investigated, people that might be consulted, and a clear delineation of your expectations that might be quite different from what Mike experienced with other managers. Second, why didn’t you check with Mike at appropriate times to find out where he was heading?