Good managers? - By Dave Winsborough
Good Managers
Ask someone about good versus bad managers they’ve worked for and easily distinguish between the two. But how exactly do “good” and “bad” managers differ? Is good merely the absence of bad? Or does being good require more o
Good Managers
Ask someone about good versus bad managers they’ve worked for and easily distinguish between the two. But how exactly do “good” and “bad” managers differ? Is good merely the absence of bad? Or does being good require more of certain behaviors or different ones entirely?
We know that good managers matter. A study of management practices of 732 manufacturing firms in the United States, Great Britain, France, and Germany found that the firm’s financial performance was a function of the degree to which they followed “well- established management practices” in the areas of operations, performance management, and talent management. (Bloom & Van Reenen, 2007). Staff engagement is most strongly linked to the behaviour of leaders (Harter, Schmidt & Hayes, 2002). And a study conducted at Florida State University shows that the oft-quoted line – “Employees leave their bosses, not their jobs” – is more than just a line (Harvey, et al., 2007).
But what makes the difference?
One of the most useful and enduring notions in psychology is the concept of the just noticeable difference, or JND. Discovered by E. H. Weber in the 1800s, it describes the smallest difference in any stimulus detectable by human perception. Weber worked with weights: adding 1 gram to one gram held in the hand is noticeably heavier, but does adding 1 gram to 60 make a noticeable change in your perception of weight? You can run his experiment at home if you have a dimmer switch on your lights; simply turn the light up and down, and see if you can find the right ‘tweak’ necessary for you to notice that the light grow brighter or darker. That’s the JND. This psychological concept is very useful across a range of circumstances. How much colour needs to go in paint for buyers to judge it has changed from white to off-white? What is the largest price hike we can get away with before consumers notice and stop buying? How much smoke and noise can boy-racers extract from their car tires before they erupt in flames? Weber’s law is also important in understanding how humans adapt. Anyone who has gone to a school reunion and seen childhood mates will be suddenly struck by the realisation that everyone else looks old, whereas when you looked in the mirror that morning you looked just the same as ever. The experience of our own aging process is gradual so that we rarely actually notice changes in our appearance, hearing or sight – until younger people start wondering why you have the TV turned up too loud or you see an older person reflected in the shop window and realise it’s you.
The JND might also apply to more nuanced judgements about human skills – such as leadership or management. At a large call centre we know of, the office gossip has it that Sam is an average manager and Jane is good – but Joanne is a star. Joanne is excellent in every way: competent, personable, firm, but supportive. She gives off a great deal of energy. With Sam and Jane there is a noticeable difference but no-one can quite put their finger on just what. Both are pleasant, both are technically competent – but Jane is good and Sam isn’t quite as good. Jane’s staff work harder and seem more engaged than Sam’s staff. We can notice there is a difference, but we can’t quite say how they differ. Does Jane have more of what Sam has? Or is it different skills or qualities?
To put things into perspective, let’s look at where the JND is very large - bad managers. We explored the differences between bad, good, and great managers using our database of over 7,000 360 ratings of New Zealand managers. Bad managers, defined as the bottom 10% of rated managers, stood out from the rest in terms of being unable to manage themselves:
First, they are poor at managing their own emotions and behaviour. Compared to better managers, they neither take feedback nor adjust their behaviour to fit their audience or situation.
Second, bad managers lack integrity. They avoid personal accountability and don’t meet their commitments. They are seen as dishonest in their dealings with others and their behaviour is inconsistent with the expressed values of their firm.
Third, they are bad at coaching their staff and don’t make tough performance-related calls.
Finally, the staff who work for bad leaders feel ignored. These leaders make minimal efforts to develop or grow their people, don’t discuss development needs with their staff, nor do they encourage them.
The Florida State University study of bad managers found that: 39% of employees said their managers failed to keep promises 37% said their managers didn’t give them credit where it was due 31% said their managers gave them the “silent treatment” in the past year 27% said their managers made negative comments about them to other employees or managers
Read that last one again. Small wonder their employees are leaving them.
The light is very dim down here with the bad managers – the tweak required to stop being bad is about turning up the dial on self-control, being responsive to feedback, and making more efforts to coach and support subordinates.
But the transition to being good requires a step change in the JND. What really defines them is something different altogether. Our data indicates the behaviours that define bad managers are hygiene factors. Being good means having mastered the fatal flaws we see in bad managers – low integrity, high selfishness and low resilience. It is a given that good managers have the trust and respect of their staff and are involved in employees’ professional growth.
To understand that difference, consider two well-known New Zealand coaches in the Super 15 rugby competition. John Mitchell, the ex-All Black coach, has struggled to get his teams (the Chiefs, then the Western Force, and now the Lions) to perform consistently.
Known to be irascible and cold, Mitchell made the headlines for all the wrong reasons when he lost the confidence of his All Black team in the World Cup of 2003, after benching the inspirational player Tana Umaga. Now consider one of the most successful coaches of the most successful teams in the Super 15, Todd Blackadder of the Crusaders. Blackadder is known for his humility, politeness, and understated style. Players revere him. A whole province adores him – even my wife, who hates rugby, knows who he is. His philosophy emphasises the team over the individual and the importance of ‘giving back’ – to the club, the community, and the sport.
When we looked at the competencies that differentiate good managers we found what might be called the “Blackadder effect". The JND from bad to good reveals two key new capabilities: high level interpersonal skill and working at a different level – setting a vision, managing change, and building the team.
Good managers have high level interpersonal skills, which involves honest, open and frequent communication with staff. They focus on developing others and building effective relationships that others trust.
Second, good managers transcend their own needs and step up to focus on building and developing great teams – or as Todd Blackadder has said, “It’s not about me being successful, it’s about the team being successful.” Indeed, this is a crucial turning point in the transition from bad to good – to concentrate on building an effective team means working at a different level altogether.
Finally good managers help people and teams to be flexible and to change. Being adaptable – being able to cope with change and lead in turbulent times is one of the most important managerial competencies. Good leaders can do it.
Another way to understand the JND of managerial competence is via a simple model of leadership growth: the domain model. Developed by Hogan and Warrenfeltz (2003), they suggest that all models of leadership can be collapsed into four broad categories of behaviour:
4.technical competence 3.lead teams 2.build relationships
.
.
1. manage self
The great insight of the domain model is that it presents a hierarchy of trainability. Technical competence is the easiest to learn – one can acquire the skills necessary to be a project manager for example. But as one moves down the hierarchy the skills become harder to learn or change. Good leaders have mastered the bottom of the pyramid and manage themself well.
The JND for good managers is clear – they move from Mitchell to Blackadder. They have developed good character and manage their dark behaviour. They are bright in the domains of relationships and leadership.
References
Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2007). Measuring and explaining management practices across firms and countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 22, 1341-1408.
Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hayes, T.L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 268-279.
Harvey, P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with abusive supervisors: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 264-280.
Hogan, R. & Warrenfeltz, R. Educating the modern manager. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2003, Vol. 2, No. 1, 74-84.