The Architecture of Managing People

The Architecture of Managing People

All managers and employees become involved in the observation and judgment of “people management.”  In each of my jobs I needed to play two roles at the same time:  employee and manager.  The quest to achieve in the corporate structure demanded that the issues of personal accomplishment be tied to my ability to understand my boss’s wants and desires.  I also needed the ability to interpret those wants so as to determine which projects were to be accomplished by myself, and which by my subordinates.  Finally, I needed the skills to decide how to best manage and help those assigned to work on those projects.  What made all this more difficult was the reality that I had my own agenda of ideas and issues which I felt were important, and that I knew my subordinates also had ideas, wants, and wishes that each of them felt were important.

The goal, then, was to convince my boss that I was effective (by getting his list done); to get my own list done; and to be a good manager by letting my employees grow and work with some independence.  It was obvious to me that without a clear set of management principles, an architectural plan, if you will, there was no way I could consistently get things done; I wouldn’t be successful.

From training people, team building, going to seminars, and reading other management books, it seemed that while each system of ideas was useful in some way, none allowed for a reliable philosophy from which to build a consistent management style or approach.  Each represented a technique, a thought, a belief or some knowledge that helped, but didn’t explain how all this works.  What I needed was a simple and overall plan, philosophy, or blueprint in which I could place all these thoughts and management ideas so that they would be more effective.

I have concluded that there are four basic principles that serve as the framework for all management concepts and practices.  These four principles can be likened to the supporting pillars of a building.  They form the basic structure of the overall management process.  Once you understand and embrace these principles, you can design and tailor your management concepts and practices in a focused and meaningful way.

Principle #1:  Recognize that people will do What they think they ought to do How they think They ought to do it.

No matter how regimented the task, the human spirit demands personal interpretation.  America was built on the concept of “doing it my way”: songs have been written eulogizing the concept of personal choice, our schools preach individualism, our heroes in business are the ones who break out of the pack and distinguish themselves above the crowd.  With all of this emphasis on personal choice it seems ridiculous when a manager wants his or her subordinate to not only do the project, but to do it the same way they would do it themselves.

The fact is that in order to be considered a quality manager, and to get the best results, you need to have individuals embrace, enhance and enlarge any given task or project with their own personal energy and ideas.  This individual personal involvement is not only the energy that drives quality working environments, but the basic fuel that takes a project from just being completed to potential group breakthrough. I have known managers who grumble that they don’t want their people to think–they just want them to do what they were told.  I submit that this is not possible, that the human spirit requires judgment, interpretation, decisions and commitment.  The most basic principle of a solid management philosophy is that people will process information, directions, orders, tasks, and issues in light of who they are and their experience.  They will then make judgments on what must be done, and how they feel the project should be completed.  It is imperative that a manager enter all discussions knowing that the individuals involved will interpret the conversation their own way, and choose actions they feel are appropriate.  This process is the essence of what you want as a manager.  Without this principle, a manager is limited by his or her own mediocrity.

Principle #2:  Know the values of the people you work with and what they want to accomplish.

Have you ever been involved with a person in a project that was completed successfully but you didn’t like the method by which it was accomplished?  For a manager this becomes a true dilemma.  The project is completed, your boss said “Good job,” but you didn’t like the method used.  The hardest concept to deal with after accepting Principle #1 and designing your management style to use it as an asset, is the fact that there is the potential for lots of conflict between different people’s values and personal standards.  You are now confronted with success you don’t like; if you are not careful the next project will have you reverting back to what you will call “hands on” management.  You will tighten the reins and try to micro manage to ensure your values are not violated and in turn things will get worse.

The critical element in knowing the values of the people you work with is based upon knowing people.  There are many seminars that talk about personality types — Meyers Briggs and Quadrant management styles (red, blue, green), to name just a few.  All of these seminars enhance your ability to understand yourself as well as other people.  I don’t know how a manager would be promoted without learning about peoples’ personalities and tendencies.  They must know it takes all types of personalities to become a great team – that a work group in which everyone acts and thinks and processes information in the same manner is doomed to failure – that the concept of “team” in the work place is the future, as long as it is embraced in a way that enhances and allows the strengths that come from diversity.  Principle #1 must be believed.

But knowing about personality styles and motivating, trusting information, processing the information and then making a decision are only part of the value equation.  The other half of the equation are all the personal integrity questions:  trust, respect for others, selflessness and showing of ego, and ultimately, self-confidence.

I believe that two thoughts illustrate the majority of the dialogue on these “soft” issues of personal values.  The book Everything I Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, by Robert Fulghum, is true.  What did preschool and kindergarten teach us?  Sharing, respect for other people’s toys and space, letting someone finish their sentences, not stealing another person’s food, working together to build things.  I think you can tell when someone didn’t go to preschool or flunked kindergarten.

As a manager, the hardest issue to deal with is a subordinate who doesn’t share your value system.  This problem demands that the manager have a clear understanding of his or her own value system – otherwise there is strong potential for the fight to allow the lowest common denominator to determine the group’s value level.  When confronted with a subordinate who does not share your values, you must clearly define which values the subordinate has violated, and address only one at a time.  The emotion in this type of conflict can create tremendous stress, because suggesting a person has poor values challenges their very fiber.  A personal charge such as this can explode into a nightmare for an organization, but ignoring the issue puts the whole work group in a difficult place.  Trust and respect are greatly challenged if differences in values are not properly addressed.

A second thought about people’s values concerns an individual’s level of self-confidence.  It has long been known that people with low self-esteem are more difficult to deal with than those with high self-esteem.  An appropriate level of self-esteem means an individual has utilized his or her past training and experiences well, and understands their significance without allowing the past to preclude future growth.  It is important for a person to feel comfortable and confident making decisions that enhance a project without becoming arrogant and risking its outcome.

It is very important that the manager interview his current employees and potential employees with the understanding that once a value problem arises, it is the most difficult management problem to solve.  I have always spent a lot of time with my key division subordinate explaining the reasons for my decisions.  I truly believe that over time, subordinates given an understanding of your values, will tend to adapt these values in making their own decisions.  Once this value consistency is reached, the work group is staged to achieve higher and higher levels of performance because there are greater and greater levels of trust and respect.

Principle #3:  Know what success looks like.

The first two principles are more about beliefs and truths than management activities.  Principle #3 is the number one management activity.  Delivering clear pictures of what success looks like consumes 50 to 60% of my time.  To have people comprehend what success looks like you must understand that they learn in many different ways, and that the process requires a variety of skills that change with the complexity and scope of the picture you are trying to deliver.  This is further complicated by the fact that in some instances, no one really has a clear picture of success; all that is known is that change is required–and no one really knows where it will lead.  In many ways, this statement might best describe America in the 90’s:  we know that we must change, but what will it look like when we get there?  This thought will be the constant companion of American managers for a long time to come.

If all of this is true, then what must be done?  Obviously there is no single answer, but a few simple thoughts might clarify this problem and allow the manager to thrive at delivering a clear picture of success.

Thought #1:  A picture of success vs. an objective.

American management and American business schools have decided that if everybody has a clear objective things will be all right.  I believe that this is one of the biggest problems in American management.  Management has copped out to a statement of objective and then looked for someone to blame when it didn’t work – but an objective just doesn’t do it.  So, management says the objective is to run a 7.5% sales increase, or the objective is to hold expenses to under 32% or to gain a 23% share of the market.  Though achieving any of these goals might be considered success, they fail to take into account the fact that human beings make decisions, process information, and communicate this energy to things that have more than one dimension.  They need a picture they can touch, feel, smell, and connect to.  It is hard to feel anything about a 7.5% increase because the activities required to achieve it require people to act from a set of decisions, relationships, and activities on a daily basis.   People need to see success in its smaller elements while the larger vision is presented as it relates to them personally.

I had the opportunity to attend a five-day facilitator training program presented by Mr. Lou Tice of the Tice Institute.  Though Mr. Tice’s program has gone up and down in the land of meaningful training programs, his basic premise is correct.  You can’t accomplish something you haven’t decided you want, or can’t define in a first person, present tense description.  The use of affirmations has significant merit in human beings’ ability to embrace a concept, and make decisions and judgments to obtain desired results.  Mere objectives will never be enough to make people adopt a clear direction, understand the relationship of the picture to their individual behavior, and allow them to make decisions and judgments with clear and appropriate self-confidence.  The use of affirmations is much more appropriate; they help individuals understand how the big picture relates to their individual behaviors and responsibilities.

Thought #2:  There is not always a clear picture.

Sometimes, maybe most of the time, there is no clear picture of what success looks like.  Something has to change, and there is a general direction in which the group must head, but no one has a complete picture of what it will look like when the group gets there.  This is often the dilemma of the more senior manager.  When I was assigned to run the marketing and sales promotion division of The Bon Marche, I was instructed to bring the company to the next level.  Little did I know that five years later, this would include redoing every aspect of the organization, from installing photo studios, to developing an electronic publishing system – from changing the creative department, to designing and moving into new physical space – from doubling the staff, to completely restructuring the staff groups.  Throughout all of this, we also established new procedures for deciding what was to be produced, and how to do it.

The process of this transition became more important than the picture – because it was the process that developed the picture.  The point was, though I could not share a real clear picture of what the division would look like when we were finished everybody seemed to know when the process was complete.  When there is not a clear picture, there must be a clear and well-understood process.  All subordinates must understand how the process works and how they are to be involved.  The process replaces the picture, and as the employees adopt it, the group still gains most of the same benefits of having a clearly defined picture.  I discuss different types of process management in Types of Management.

Thought #3:  People learn and connect to thoughts and concepts in different ways.

With all of the energy being directed toward education, learning styles, right brain/left brain functions, management styles, learning disorders, etc., it seems obvious to me that though the concept of delivering a clear picture of success is relatively simple, the skill required to be effective is more complex.  While there is no simple checklist of activities, there are a few basic standards you must deal with:

Gary’s Code:  The key to understanding is in the detail, and the detail is the written word.

Whatever the learning style of the people you work with, a short, concise written document is a must.  First, at least 50% of the people need to read a concept or idea in order to give it quality reflection.  In Donald Trump’s The Art of the Deal, one major idea makes the whole book worth reading.  The thought is that in a competitive world the person with the best, most well thought-out plan wins.  A written document that describes the overall objective (who, what, when, where, and how) allows all the people who must deal with the plan to not only understand, but add key thoughts and ideas.

You can write your ideas down in detail, explain to people one at a time what you want, and hold group meetings to ensure the group knows what you want.  But no matter how much the time you spend doing these things, it is still highly possible that the picture and the detail will not be clear.  Managers cannot spend too much time clarifying the picture of success and discussing the details of that picture with their subordinates.

I have spent a long time in the discussion of what success looks like.  I submit that as a manager and as an employee, there is no concept more important to understand.

Principle #4:  Give people resources and get out of their way.

This is where concepts such as the “one minute manager,” servitude management, and the art of delegation all fit.  You see people decide what they should do, related to their specific job and tasks, and they choose how to get it done.  Now it is your job to get the needed resources for your people and let them do their job.  How many times has a well-conceived plan been managed to death by a manager who could not let go?  You must be attentive and present to ensure ongoing clarification of the picture.  It will always need discussion but you can’t micro-manage your subordinates or they will make no personal commitment to the project.

As a manager, I no longer necessarily have the fun of doing projects.  To deal with that problem, I keep some projects for myself, and don’t allow anyone else to manage them.  I get involved with all aspects and everybody knows that these are my projects.  Instead of micro-managing other people’s projects, I micro-manage my own.  This allows me to stay very busy and excited about my job and my own learning curve, and lets my subordinates have the trust and respect that must be given if you truly believe Principle #1.

At the opening of this essay, I said that all the seminars, books, courses, and principles of management are important and have merit, but that I personally needed a framework within which to place those concepts in order to better understand, and, in turn, use them.  I truly believe that this blueprint of management allows for the overall framework within which many of these concepts can be used.