ASAP – “as soon as possible”, this acronym has been in use for over 50 years. Its use is ubiquitous.

ASAP is all too frequently slapped on to every memo or email where a dues date is to be found. How does this help to prioritize work? What does it say about the person making the request? Will sometime tomorrow be just as good? Maybe next week sometime? Perhaps the requestor does not really know when they need it. When does the person requesting really need it? Is this a symptom of out of control work processes?  

Is this a crisis request? If it is then it is very important that the request date be the result of a negotiation with the person(s) providing the service or product. 

Next time you receive a request with a due date of “ASAP” send it back to the requestor noting, “ASAP means never. When do you really need it?” That will get the necessary conversation moving in the right direction. Do this even with your boss. Point out that ASAP does not help set priorities. Work takes time and the real question to be answered is what work will be delayed to get something urgent done.

1. Invest in culture as a corporate asset
2. Make listening an enterprisewide (sic) skill
3. Turn innovation into a continuous process
4. Provide a clear and compelling purpose
5. Extend and enhance the digital fabric
6. Practice good social citizenship

Lists like this one are very popular. I have been known to make lists of key practices and the like. But for the practicing manager lists are frequently tough to integrate into day-to-day work. Mr. Temkin’s six imperatives falls into this problem category. Overall, the six imperatives are reasonable enough as they stand. But I want to take a closer look at each and then suggest a more global approach.

Practice good social citizenship

Lets start with the sixth, “Practice good social citizenship”. This defies the laws of capitalism. Capitalism has never been about doing anyone other than the firm good. In fact, there are enormous built-in penalties for firms that attempt to do anything significant in this realm. One only needs to review the history of the last year or so to see that companies act in their own (management not necessarily stockholder) best interests.

Even today we are being treated a new episode in this  debacle in Europe with the near collapse of the common Euro currency under the weight of Greek financial malfeasance. Would not good social citizenship lead Goldman Sachs and the other big banks not enable the bad habits of the Greek government?

One of the primary rules of capitalism is that every individual firm seeks to externalize any and every cost that it can. You can see this all around in day-to-day life. Why do we have environmental laws that attempt to restrict how companies deal with the waste from their processes? Why do we have Workers’ Compensation Laws? How is it that the largest financial institutions in the country drove themselves into insolvency only because they knew that they would be shielded by the American government from failure? You can add you own examples to this list.

The forces of externalizing whatever a firm can and the desire to make profits wherever possible under any conditions, even outright illegal ones, has always overwhelmed calls for “good social citizenship”. Nothing in Mr. Temkin’s recommendations will change this. This imperative is just window dressing.

Invest in culture as a corporate asset

Every manager knows that company culture is important. Mostly, this awareness has grown through learning to manage in environments that are toxic or moderately negative at best. So this imperative makes some intuitive sense. A central problem emerges when you try to develop a strategy and tactics to carry out this imperative. Without an actionable definition of what corporate culture is, it feels like pushing the proverbial string towards an unknown objective.

So, lets step back a moment and ask, “What does ‘corporate culture’ mean?”

Wikipedia suggests some of the complexities in its definition of “organizational culture” in the following quotation from the beginning of its discussion:

This definition continues to explain organizational values also known as “beliefs and ideas about what kinds of goals members of an organization should pursue and ideas about the appropriate kinds or standards of behavior organizational members should use to achieve these goals. From organizational values develop organizational norms, guidelines or expectations that prescribe appropriate kinds of behavior by employees in particular situations and control the behavior of organizational members towards one another.”

Organizational culture is not the same as corporate culture. It is wider and deeper concepts, something that an organization ‘is’ rather than what it ‘has’.

Corporate culture is the total sum of the values, customs, traditions and meanings that make a company unique. Corporate culture is often called “the character of an organization” since it embodies the vision of the company’s founders. The values of a corporate culture influence the ethical standards within a corporation, as well as managerial behavior.

Mr. Temkin suggests tactics for managers to use to “manage their corporate assets”: ^[[2]]

1. Track employee goodwill
2. Develop a Voice of the Employee Program
3. Establish a vocabulary around culture
4. Actively manage it.

There is merit in each of these but without a useful understanding of the existing culture and a definition of the corporate culture you are trying to build. These programs will lead nowhere.

Here are a few references to statements by companies about their culture:

• Google
• Bunker Hill Home Insurance
• Kaplan Real Estate (PDF download)
• CareerBuilder.com
• Altera

As you have discovered there is considerable variability in what is, and is not, included in the actual day-to-day usage of the term “culture”. Nevertheless, there are lots of common threads here. The question then becomes how do you define the culture of your organization, and how do you make changes that respond to the gaps between the future states and the present state? More on how I might respond to this below.

Make Listening An Enterprisewide Skill

Listening as an active skill is required at the personal and organizational level. Every good and great manager is, by definition, a great listener. So, this imperative fits into the obvious category. The Web has opened new avenues to practice listening and made it possible for listening to the outside world, to customers, competitors, technologists, and so on, accessible far inside every organization. And, in parallel, the Web has made it possible for employees and managers to listen to each other in ways not possible earlier. Tempkin’s suggestions for how managers can cultivate listening are good:

• Listen in a variety of ways
• Listen by example (senior managers need to demonstrate active listening)
• Listen to employees
• Listen for soft voices
• Listen to online communities
• Actively encourage listening

But, Tempkin’s claim, “The bottom line: enterprise listening allows firms to embrace change”, is not satisfying. Listening is a way of engaging with those around you. It is a methodology for discovering what is going on and why. Listening supports real engagement by employees and stakeholders. Listening opens the social space to the creation of new ideas and connections. Listening provides moments when the brain of listener is taking information in instead of thinking about the next point they want to make. But, the connection between listening and embracing change is not causal nor even necessarily suggestive of a significant link. Embracing change requires an understanding of either the opportunities to be gained or disasters avoided. Listening is simply one of the many activities that might go on while change is considered, put off, avoided, or rushed towards.

Turn Innovation into a Continuous Process

Here is an imperative chock full of key words, innovation, continuous, and process. These are bread and butter for every high performance organization. There have been, and continue to be, significant experimentation worldwide in how to foster and drive innovation. Many of these encompass far more than individual companies. Whole countries are trying to foster innovation through combinations of academic, government, and private sector assets. But, to focus on the company level, there are numerous models of innovation. One thing they all share is a view of innovation as a process, a continuous process. Despite the use of the words “continuous process” in Mr. Temkin’s imperative, there is only a hint that a company has to define its own innovation process^[[3]].

As with other of Mr. Temkin’s imperatives the suggested tactics are good, just lacking a strategic and process based context. And this is why most companies that are serious about innovation answer Temkin’s closing challenge, “The Bottom Line: innovation is too important to leave to chance.”, by building a continuous innovation process into their overall company architecture.

Provide a Clear and Compelling Purpose

Temkin hits squarely on the central issue with Mission, Vision and Strategic Plans and Statements of all varieties.  “Just about every large organization has vision and mission statements floating around their hallways. But when it comes to making decisions on a day-to-day basis, these documents are no where to be found. They play NO Role in how the company is actually run.” Unfortunately. Temkin offers us a less then compelling set of recommendations.

• Rediscover your brand
• Look for alignment
• Market to employees
• Make decisions purposefully

The corporate world has been filled with experiments on how to solve the problem of putting strategy to work. It is clear that bridging the gap between vision and planning and day-to-day tactics requires a structured business process and  a lot of management energy to assure that the process is working continuously. Speaking of decisions, Peter Drucker pointed out in his 1967 book, The Effective Executive^[[4]] “”Unless a decision has ‘degenerated into work’ it is not a decision; it is at best a good intention.” This is still true and points to the fact that visioning and planning are the easy part, the tough work is putting the plans into action and having them become the day-to-day work of the company.

Here are a few names and phrases that you can investigate to learn more about current business processes that address this issue:

• MBO (Management by Objective – one of the original concepts)
• Hoshin Planning
• Balanced Scorecard

“Market to employees” is an unfortunate phrase. The very word ‘marketing’ inspires nothing but cynicism from every person on the face of the planet who has ever been exposed to the dreadnought of corporate pr, advertising, and general corporate manipulation. Management needs to communicate transparently and honestly with its employees and simultaneously try to be honest about the limits of its transparency and honesty. Almost 30 years ago, one of the original high-performance systems management gurus, W. Edwards Deming, in his 14 key management principles wrote:

Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.

Now, you may object that marketing is not “slogans, exhortations, and targets”. However, there are very few, if any, managements that do not descend to exactly this when addressing their employees. And focusing on this part of Deming’s principle is to miss the perhaps more powerful idea, fact perhaps, that the “causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.” Management controls the design and deployment of the company’s systems. They set the rules of work, provide training (or not) and guidance to getting the work done. Until management accepts its true responsibilities for the success and failure of the company, marketing to employees will always be seen as the manipulative cynical act it is.

Extend and Enhance the Digital Fabric

There can be no arguing with the momentum of the pervasive Web. The visible opportunities here are so numerous and the ones yet to be discovered likely to be just as numerous, so the imperative for every organization to engage is obvious. Temkin states four ideas for executives to keep in mind:

• Understand digital economics
• Assume increasing adoption
• Improve usability, a lot
• Connect online with offline

One point concerning Temkin’s view of digital economics is that business model making should never be left to finance people. Managers must take the initiative here because no finance team will reliably understand customer interactions and operations. Without the input from those directly involved at the front lines, finance driven business models almost invariably look good, even very sophisticated, but are usually disconnected from the realities of the business.

Temkin’s comments about connecting online with offline bring to mind again a guiding principle, one that is at the heart of his work. Every effort to design systems must begin with the requirements of customers, whether these are end customers or intermediary internal customers. Only by beginning with the customer view can you sort out the correct balance of system functions and user interfaces, whether online or offline. This process starts with customers, and only then involves others who play a role in creating and refining a company’s operational systems.

Epilogue: It’s Time To Reinvent Management

There is much that could be said about this call for reinvention. One thought stands out. Real change in management comes from two sources, the external realities that impinge on companies and senior management’s attention and approach to how to respond to the external realities. The first, the external realities, are uncontrollable, though at times unknowable, facts. The only controllable factor is senior management’s approaches to their work. Only when senior management brings new, more powerful models of management to bear on their work do matters like what MBAs learn, or how, and to what extent, the company trains staff have meaning to the results.

I have argued for years that the best systematic models of management are to be found in the arena of high-performance business systems. These are now widely known and globally deployed through models like Toyota Production System^[[5]], Baldrige Criteria, EFQM Excellence Model, and ISO9001-2008 Quality Management System. Though they differ in many siginficant ways, there is also substantial overlap, particularly at the top level of guiding principles and practices, All of them are widely used and under continuous improvement by users and experts.

If you would like to begin the journey towards high performance management consider these 14 management principles from The Toyota Way^[[6]] :

I. Having a long-term philosophy that drives a long-term approach to building a learning organization

1. Base your management decisions on a long-term philosophy, even at the expense of short-term financial goals

II. The right process will produce the right results

1. Create a continuous process flow to bring problems to the surface
2. Use “pull” systems to avoid overproduction
3. Level out the workload (heijunka). (Work like the tortoise, not the hare)
4. Build a culture of stopping to fix problems, to get quality right the first time
5. Standardized tasks and processes are the foundation for continuous improvement and employee empowerment
6. Use visual control so no problems are hidden
7. Use only reliable, thoroughly tested technology that serves your people and processes

III. Add value to the organization by developing its people and partners

1. Grow leaders who thoroughly understand the work, live the philosophy, and teach it to others
2. Develop exceptional people and teams who follow your company’s philosophy
3. Respect your extended network of partners and suppliers by challenging them and helping them improve

IV. Continuously solving root problems to drive organizational learning

1. Go and see for yourself to thoroughly understand the situation (Genchi Genbutsu).
2. Make decisions slowly by consensus, thoroughly considering all options; implement decisions rapidly (Nemawashi).
3. Become a learning organization through relentless reflection (hansei) and continuous improvement (Kaizen).

1. experiencematters.wordpress.com
2. I will not provide citations for mentions from Mr. Temkin’s book. It is only 15 pages long and so you can figure out the citations by just downloading and reading it.
3. the hint is in his last suggestion, ‘manage an innovation pipeline’
4. Peter Drucker, The Effective Executive – the definitive guide to getting the right things done, (Harper Collins, NY,  2006) p. 114
5. TPS and further expanded in scope in the Toyota Management System
6. adapted from Liker, Jeffrey. The Toyota Way. 1st ed. McGraw-Hill, 2003.

“DO YOU…

1. IMPROVE basic, measured efficiencies continuously?
2. THINK simply and directly about what you are doing and why?
3. BEHAVE towards others as you wish them to behave towards you?
4. EVALUATE each business and business opportunity with total, fact-based objectivity?
5. CONCENTRATE on what you do well?
6. ASK questions ceaselessly about performance, markets and objectives?
7. MAKE MONEY- knowing that, if you don’t, you can’t make anything else?
8. ECONOMISE always seeking Limo (Least Input for Most Output)?
9. FLATTEN the organisation to spread authority and responsibility?
10. ADMIT to your own failings and shortcomings and correct them?
11. SHARE the benefits of success with all those who helped to achieve it?
12. TIGHTEN up the organisation wherever and whenever you can because familiarity breeds slackness?
13. ENABLE everybody to optimise their individual and group contribution?
14. SERVE your customers with all their requirements to standards of perceived excellence in quality?
15. TRANSFORM performance by innovating creatively in products and processes including the processes of management?

Again from this email concerning this list: “These questions penetrate to the heart of successful management. They have passed, and will pass, the test of time.

This list looks a lot like others I have seen, and certainly many entries would be on such a list that I might create. But, whenever I see lists like this, I say to myself, “Great, but how do I do this?” Lets just take number 15, for example,  “Transform performance by innovating….”. What business processes do I put in place that assure that these results are regularly and sustainably produced? Or, what approaches and tools do I deploy to achieve number 8, “Economize…” ? Again, are there tools and approaches available that assure the we meet number 13, “ENABLE everybody to optimize their individual and group contribution?”

Without wasting further time with rhetorical questions, let me point out that in fact there are well-developed, well-tested systems of business processes available for a manager who wants and needs to achieve positive answers to questions like those posed by Heller. These include Lean^[[2]] , Baldrige^[[3]] , EFQM^[[4]] , or ISO9001-2008^[[5]]. None of these are simple cookbooks of management. The reality of management problems is much more complex and requires some subtlety in thinking through how to apply the principles and practices of these management systems to the individual enterprise. Nevertheless, these management systems provide the tools to systematically achieve results that answer the 15 points of this checklist, and more.

There is something else that interests me about lists like Heller’s 15. These lists almost always contain a provocative overlap between the attributes and skills of the manager and those of the organization. This overlap produces an opportunity (and responsibility) for the manager to drive the development and maintenance of these attributes in the organization. On the other hand, without the manager embodying a number of these attributes and skills, the organization will not come to embody them. In this case the manager’s performance is a negative driver of performance.

Lets take a look at a couple of Heller’s 15 as examples of this overlap phenomenon.

Number 4, “EVALUATE each business and business opportunity with total, fact-based objectivity?” calls for a fact-based approach to business. If the manager does not act, think, and talk in a fact-based manner consistently and rigorously, the organization will veer off this path quickly in response. If a manager does not gather facts and make decisions based on facts^[[6]] the organization will note this and begin to act in a fashion consistent with whatever decision making process the manager uses. This is a simple fact of life. People will do as the boss does, not as the boss says. On the other hand, if the manager is fact-centered in decision making, the organization will respond in like.

Number 13, “ENABLE everybody to optimise their individual and group contribution?”, is another interesting example of the overlap between the personal approaches and performance of the manager and and those of the organization. Central to every high-performance organization is the challenge to create an environment in which every person can and does make a fully engaged and productive contribution to the organization. The manager’s involvement in cross-functional team-based work expressly embodies this approach. After all, the people who report to a general manager (CEO, divisional manager, owner) are by definition cross-functional and they should solve the organization’s challenges as a cross-functional team. If the manager carries out his/her work in a cross-functional team-based manner, this will drive and support similar approaches throughout the organization. And, similar to our earlier discussion, failure here will support traditional management methods of command and control.

This overlap between the individual and the organizational is a great resource for the manager who wants to build a high-performance organization. They can make a direct contribution to the transformation by learning new approaches and skills and applying them in their day-to-day work. And, really, the principles and practices are quite straight forward. It requires more persistence than genius to build high-performance organizations. The transformation process is not like building a rocket where every part must work perfectly to even get off the launch pad.

1. http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/
2. Lean is the American name for the Toyota Production System, also more broadly the Toyota Business System. There is no standards organization for lean principles and practices. A good starting point is Womack, James P., and Daniel T. Jones. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, Revised and Updated. 2nd ed. Free Press, 2003 and The Lean Enterprise Institute
3. Baldrige National Quality Program Criteria
4. European Foundation for Quality Management
5. International Organization for Standardization ISO9001-2008 Quality management systems — Requirements
6. Here is an interesting point about “facts”. Facts are by definition observable and independent of any individual. Facts exist in the shared space of the organization; they do not belong to any person, but to the organization.

I recently read 12 The Elements of Great Managing by Rodd Wagner and James K. Harter (Gallup Press, New York 2006) another in this series. Don’t be deceived by the title, this book is really speaking from the perspective of how employees experience high-performance management. So a little translation is required to uncover the implied principles and practices of the 12 elements. Here are the twelve elements as presented in the introduction to the book^[[1]] .

1. I know what is expected of me at work
2. I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right.
3. At work, I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.
4. In the last seven days, I have received recognition or praise for doing good work.
5. My supervisor, or someone at work, seems to care about me as a person.
6. There is someone at work who encourages my development.
7. At work, my opinions seem to count.
8. The mission or purpose of my company makes me feel my job is important.
9. My associates or fellow employees are committed to quality work.
10. I have a best friend at work.
11. In the last six months, someone at work has talked to me about my progress.
12. This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow.

A footnote at the end of this listing states that “Each of the Q12© statements above represent millions of dollars of investment by Gallup researchers…..”. This is one of the reasons these Gallup books are interesting. There is lots of data embedded in them. It is well worth the time to read through and absorb the anecdotes that flow from the data.

The questions I have about this list are not about the validity of these statements. They seem to jive very well both with anecdotal observation and the findings of many other studies about the attitudes and feelings of people in high performance organizations. The questions facing a manager is how to create the business culture, infrastructure and processes that produces these results in the human resources of the organization?

Without attempting anything exhaustive here, let’s take a look at several of these 12 elements and see how one might convert them into actionable tasks for a manager.

Looking at the first two elements,  applying Lean principles and practices creates an environment in which every person knows what is expected of them, how they are to accomplish the tasks, when the results are required, and what success looks like in terms of detailed deliverables of a product or service.  And, they receive immediate feedback concerning all of these characteristics from those around them in the work flow.

Since good Lean work design involves visual, simple feedback mechanisms, quality is a result of the process and failures are dealt with immediately. Apply Lean principles and practices develops processes that directly connect the work at hand to elements eight and nine. Central to Lean practices is the principle that quality is a outcome of the process and failures are identified in the flow and quality issues are resolved down to the root level.

Lean principles and practices include a focus on the development of every individual in the organization to be fully cross-functional in their skills. Typically this is implemented through specific cross-training requirements so that, over time, every individual learns to be a fully qualified practitioner of multiple skills required by the company’s processes and long-term goals. or

Element seven, “At work, my opinions seem to count.” requires some further comment. High performance organizations require the involvement of every associate’s mind and energies to solve problems and carry out the work at hand. It is not optional in a high performance environment. So, by definition, every person’s engagement counts. The word “seem” needs to be replaced by “does”.  A little further quibble here. Opinions are not very useful without the supporting facts and thought processes behind them. This is the reason that high performance organizations, whether they identify themselves under the banner of Lean^[[2]] , Baldrige^[[3]] , EFQM^[[4]] , or ISO9001-2008^[[5]] , use disciplined problem solving techniques that everyone learns to use. This assures that everyone’s engagement in the problem is represented, but the problem solving is fact-based, gets to the root, and is actionable.

Element 10, “I have a best friend at work.” is clearly beyond the control of management. It is understandably nice, but definitely not a controllable element of any work place.

Some elements are particularly subject to influence by the behaviors of senior management. Elements 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are typically elements to be found in high performance human resources management processes. But, making those processes come to life can readily be driven by the example of senior management in how they manage the selection, development and pruning of the people who report to them. If they practice sound high performance human resource practices, those practices will cascade down to everyone in the organization. It goes without saying that a component of that is direct involvement by senior management in oversight and monitoring of the health of the human resources management processes in the organization. A simple example of this is to impose a rule that no manager, even to the CEO level, can receive a pay grade review if they have any outstanding performance reviews for their subordinates. This drives timeliness quite nicely.

To conclude, this list of 12 elements is an interesting starting point to venture into high performance management. The list is really a slice of the results that flow from high performance management practices. The trick here then is to reverse engineer the list to uncover high performance practices from the world of Lean, Baldrige, and other high performance models that can be applied in your particular business environment. Building a high-performance organization is one sure approach to developing an organization that produces great results and solid answers to the 12 elements of great managing as described in 12 The Elements of Great Managing by Rodd Wagner and James K. Harter.

1. pages xi and xii
2. Lean is the American name for the Toyota Production System, also more broadly the Toyota Business System. There is no standards organization for lean principles and practices. A good starting point is Womack, James P., and Daniel T. Jones. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, Revised and Updated. 2nd ed. Free Press, 2003 and The Lean Enterprise Institute
3. Baldrige National Quality Program Criteria
4. European Foundation for Quality Management
5. International Organization for Standardization ISO9001-2008 Quality management systems — Requirements

Ms. Doyle’s concatenation of “delegation” and “outsourcing” is a very productive idea. Delegation is normally seen to be a personal act by a manager. A manager delegates certain tasks or responsibilities to someone else in the organization. Outsourcing is most frequently the retention of a third party, external to the company, to perform a function or tasks. Setting these two side by side provides an interesting example of the overlap between the personal skills and attributes of the manager and the larger practice and processes of the organization.

Delegation and outsourcing share many management requirements

Delegation and outsourcing share many management requirements. And they illustrate the overlap between the personal and organization spheres. Both benefit from a more nuanced use of the general management maxim, “Build on Your Strengths”. Both require a substantial understanding of what needs to be done, how it should be done, the results required, and the needed timelines. And, finally, both require ongoing management involvement to assure that those responsible for the tasks or functions, whether individuals or vendors, succeed.

Discern Your Strengths

Ms. Doyle argues that we should examine ourselves to determine our strengths as an initial step. She even provides a link to a tool to help in this adventure. I have talked about this earlier in my posting “Managing for Weakness – a mis-management myth“

“What are my strengths?”

The simplest way to answer this question is to look at the activities where you have had the most and best results. These are your strengths. You might enrich this line of thinking by asking which activities make you happy, put you into a state of flow where you really concentrate and loose track of time? An external, third party assessment can be helpful. I have used StrengthsFinder 2.0. It is good, adequate detail without overreaching. There are others.

Then ask this question:

“Am I spending most of my time working on my areas of strength?”

If we turn to the classical argument for outsourcing, companies are encouraged to define their core competencies (strengths) and strategic must do functions and outsource everything else. This quickly became reduced to a simple examination of the relative cost of doing a function in-house versus via a third party.

At this point delegation (here Ms. Doyle uses the term “outsourcing”) becomes an obvious solution to increasing the amount of time and energy spent doing work that fits into your strengths by offloading tasks.

Focusing on Strength Is Not Always a Good Idea

Although in general it makes eminent sense to focus on your strengths, this is not a rule that should be followed without some thought.

In my practice I can think of numerous examples where the business owner is doing a good job of obeying the “follow your strengths” rule, but, in fact, not achieving the results that the market opportunities are providing. For example, some business owners who are highly detail and control oriented find it easy and fulfilling to remain intimately involved in all sorts of processes that fit into their strengths profile like bookkeeping, inventory control, purchasing management, human resources administration, etc. They are happy doing this work because it feeds into their need for work that is detail and control oriented. Here is a case where I argue that even though they are comfortable following their strengths, they need to drop many of these tasks and devote their time to driving the marketing and sales efforts. For these particular owners, this is uncomfortable territory. This is work that focuses on some of their weaknesses. But, in small firms, even medium size firms, there is no replacing the impact of the owner/CEO in the mind of the customer. So, even though the owner may not be the best possible person to do this marketing and sales work, they are the resource available. And, the impact on the marketing and sales results will show the wisdom of this refocusing on weakness.

I would also note that managers do learn new skills, even in areas of weakness. though your natural bent may not be the world of sales and marketing, for instance, the approaches and skills required are not particle physics. There are plenty of learning tools and business coaches who can help you become more than competent even in fields that you might describe as weaknesses.

In an example of strength misdirecting, I recall a large size electronics firm, a Fortune 500 company, in the 1980s and 1990s. The great strength of this company was manufacturing. Almost all of the managers in the top ranks came from manufacturing functions. Manufacturing widgets was what they did really well. As the world of electronics evolved, they kept doing what they were good at and let product and market development work, activities critical to the future of the company,  take a back seat. Soon market share fell from 45% to 20% and the game was over. There were certainly managers at this firm who intellectually understood that they needed to make product development work and marketing a strength, knew that they needed to make these core competencies, but the inertia of the past strengths was too difficult to overcome.

So, one can not follow strengths blindly.

Three Questions for Success in Delegation and Outsourcing

What Needs to be Done, When, and What are the Results Required?

Once you have made decisions about what to delegate or outsource, a key to success is developing a clear statement of what needs to be done, when, and what are the results you want to achieve. The answers to these three questions arm you to select the best person or organization to perform the work and the basis for useful discussions of progress. Nothing like having a clear statement of the results expected to focus the collective minds. With a clear definition of what needs to be done and the results expected you can make the best choice for whom to delegate a task to. Has this person had success in achieving results in the task area defined, do they have the functional expertise required to produce the results? If you are looking at outsourcing, the same information arm you to ask questions about the track record of the various vendors. Do they have the capacity to deliver the results on time? And so on.

Taking Responsibility for the Results – Delegation and Outsourcing Do Not Get You Off The Hook

I wrote recently in a posting, “Outsourcing – not a strategy that is as simple as a make or buy decision“,

However, people may think that outsourcing gets you off the hook and solves all of the problems involved in the outsourced functions. The truth is that whether as a one armed paper hanger or a global giant like Boeing, outsourcing must be managed.   You can not manage functions that you do not understand. So, the executive level of any organization (back to the single entrepreneur to global giant span) must understand all of the basic functions of a business (strategy, sales, marketing, product/service development, personnel, operations, finance, information systems, and legal (these are the most important ones)) in order to decide which must be internal and which can be outsourced. Then, you have to have enough knowledge of the outsourced functions to decide on the desired results required, choose vendors, and manage for the results. This may seem to be daunting for the low end of the size scale, but most of this stuff isn’t rocket science at the basic concepts level and one can always draw on people in your network and consultants (like me obviously) to help out.

The same line of thinking applies to delegation. it is simply not acceptable to delegate a task and then not come back to the person tasked for six months to ask, “How are things going?”. Just as with new hires or promotions attentive, timely, and responsive supervision is required. The same rules of responsibility apply to delegated tasks. You made the choice of the person, defined the task and the results required and established a timeline for the results. It is your responsibility to assure that the person succeeds. You have the power and resources to assure that. Although I doubt that delegation is as fraught with failure as hiring new personnel, the failure rate is still high and you can not afford to simply through up your hand six months into the mission and say, “Why did you screw this up?” More here about this management issue, “It’s Always Your Fault – taking responsibility for personnel“.

In the world of planning and strategy, there is a truism that too much planning, too much detail, too much analysis, leads to inaction, to a loss of opportunity. Along the same line of observation, in the world of learning to becoming a more effective manager, there can be too much study, too much thinking, too much integration of the many many skills and aptitudes required to become more effective. In both strategy and management skills action is almost always preferable to another round of study. Action bumps you up against the real world and provides the real basis for improving skills and results.

But, that still leaves us with the nagging question as a manager, especially for rookie managers and supervisors, how do I get started?

Based on many years of personal work as a manager and many years coaching managers, here are three steps you can take that will get you into action and guarantee striking results. These results will come in your personal effectiveness and in of the results of the organization you manage.  Remember,  by results, I am referring to the three meanings Drucker defined: (1) direct business results (usually measured in $s); (2) improved organizational culture (values); and (3) development of people.^[[1]]

1. Stop Answering Questions

If most managers could listen to themselves, the proverbial fly on the wall, for just a few hours, they would discover that they are chronically enabling dependency all around them and undermining whatever formal delegation systems are in place. How is this happening? Just listen and you will hear a stream of questions coming at them followed by answers in response. You are enabling the following the reflexive pattern: ask the expert and be rewarded with answers. Ask the boss, get an answer, and be safe from responsibility for the answers.

If you want to get people to take responsibility and be involved in the business, you can’t go on answering all these questions. They will just go on asking whether they need to or not. And, you are spending an enormous amount of your time, your most valuable resource, to answering all of these questions.

What should a manager do to break this pattern?

Simply announce to the troops, “If you want to ask me a question, you have to have at least three possible answers thought through before I will consider your question. If you are having trouble coming up with answers, ask others to help you. Group thinking is always the best thinking.”

Shortly I will go into a few further refinements to make this a really effective policy. For the moment though, think of how simple it would be to put this new policy into action. The really tough step is entirely in the mind and habits of you the manager. You have to get up every morning and look yourself in the mirror and say, “My job as manager is to create an environment in which everyone can participate fully and will take responsibility. To help this along, I will help people by not answering their questions. And I will examine and fix why it is that they can not answer most of the questions that arise in their day-to-day work.”

One of the reasons managers answer so many questions from their staff and others in the company is that they fear that if they don’t, then really important issues and opportunities may be addressed incorrectly or sub optimally.

A key to getting out of the round of endless questions while still being involved in important ones, is to set some boundaries, some limits.

This might sound like this: “I want you to develop three solutions before you come to ask me a question. Ask your colleagues for help if you get stuck. But, in the case of the following critical customer, Immense Big Machines, Inc., I want to be informed of any issues involving delay or cost overruns in Project XZY.”

With the right boundaries set around your new rule, you can still be assured of being involved where you need to be.

Once you put this policy into action you are likely to see that many of your reports’ questions arise because they lack information and decision making tools. Glance down to Step 3 It’s Your Fault – Take Responsibility below and you will see that you have to take action to get these tools into place to enable your report to work effectively.

Finally, to make your staff and others in the company comfortable about taking responsibility for solving problems and answering their own questions, you need to have environment in which mistakes are expected and dealt with positively. Remember, if you are not making mistakes, you are doubtless doing very little and learning not at all. Mistakes need to be analyzed and the lessons learned. Perhaps the only rule about mistakes is that they should not be repeated.

As a bit of personal history, I implemented this step myself out of self-preservation in the midst of merging four sales departments into one. For the first couple of days some Regional Managers were frightened to death that they would make mistakes. These folks had worked for years before I came on the scene for managers who acted like your worst image of tank commanders. Other Regional Managers were delighted immediately. All of them made mistakes. The company was not adversely effected and within a few weeks almost all found their legs, helped work out the decision algorithms we needed, and I had much more time available to address all of the other issues revealed by this merger. One final note though, one manager never became comfortable making her own decisions. No amount of work on my part and her compatriots convinced her that she really should and could make decisions. Within two months she moved on, of her own accord, to a staff position in another business unit where she would not be confronted with the stream of business decisions about pricing and production priorities that every Regional Manager faced.

2. Seize Your Time – Don’t Manage It

In recent work with managers on time management, we have taken a new tack on this old problem of time.  We have encouraged managers to simply seize a block of time during the week and get to work on the really important things they feel they need to do to improve their contribution to their company.

It works like this. Look at the next week’s calendar and mark off one, or better, two hours on some day where there is nothing now scheduled or their are meetings or tasks that really can be skipped. Send an email around to everyone who reports to you announcing this time as your Private Work session. Tell them that you will be working on an important initiative and that barring a fire, you are not to be disturbed until the session is over.

When the hour arrives put a sign on your door or at the entrance to your cubicle, “Private Work Session – Do Not Disturb“. Turn off your email, instant messaging, cell phone, Blackberry, or any other communication device that can interrupt. Sit down at your desk or work table and get to work on that project that you have not gotten to because of all the other “important” tasks in your day-to-day work life.

Managers who have taken the step to seize their own time have found that they make real progress on their projects and the company does not grind to a halt.  They become daring and schedule two or three hours for the next week. Seizing personal work time also energizes their efforts to really learn how to manage their time. They already can see that they can make real progress working on the future of the company instead of constantly balled up in the day-to-day activties of the company. It is a demonstration of the power of spending significant time working on your company instead of just in it.

3. It’s Your Fault, Take Responsibility

Attracting, selecting, training, mentoring, and pruning human resources are among the most important tasks a manager confronts. Almost everyone agrees that, at every level of organizations, managers need to be devoting a significant portion of their time addressing the people needs of the firm, business unit, or department. Without the right people in the right positions, no strategy, no matter how clever, can succeed.

To be truly successful in meeting these responsibilities, a manager must embrace an all important management rule: “If an employee is working below expected or required performance it is always the manager’s fault.”

Read that through again. The manager is always responsible for sub-par work by any employee in their work group.

The first place to look for the source of poor performance is the manager. After all, the manager hired or selected the person. The manager defines the work, provides tools, training, and all other resources required for the job.  The manager is responsible for the success of every person they supervise.

An important effect of this rule is that it prevents you from entering the whinny land of thinking, or worse, saying:  “Why doesn’t Joseph pay more attention to detail?” “Mirabelle keeps making the same errors over and over in these quotes.” “Walt just doesn’t get the big picture of where this project is going and he is heading down the wrong track, for the umpteenth time.”

Embrace your responsibilities and powers to make your personnel successful.

• Make sure that you really have well thought out and planned jobs.
• Are job definitions focused on results?
• Are the task definitions actionable?
• Do the skills listed actually match up with the results you want to achieve?
• Have you provided the training required?
• Do your personnel understand where the company is going strategically and is it clear how the results of their jobs connect with these strategies?
• Have you acted promptly to provide feedback and take corrective action to support performance?
• Do you have a company culture that embraces, supports, and demands full participation by everyone?

Selection and promoting personnel are management tasks with a high error factor. Every manager needs to acknowledge that their judgments in selection and promotion of personnel are not perfect, not even close to perfect, . So, faced with a weak performance from a new hire or newly promoted person, managers must ask the question early, “Did I make a mistake here?” If you come to that conclusion you need to act promptly to correct the error.

The central point is that you selected your personnel, you set the conditions and environment of their work, your provide the tools and training, you set the expectations, the results required. If you are not getting top performance from your personnel, look to the basics, look to your own responsibilities as a manager first. After all, if you are really holding yourself accountable for these responsibilities, you will achieve equal or better performance from everyone in your organization.

The Three Steps Taken Together

These three disruptive steps will make you a more effective manager. Stop Answering Questions reveals where you need to improve training, data resources, and decision making algorithms. This step also firmly embraces and puts into action the third step, It’s Your Fault, Take Responsibility. It is a certainty that implementing the first step will librate those who report to you to perform better and by cascading the third step down the chain of command your reports will apply the first step to those who report to them with equally robust and invigorating results. Meanwhile, you will have implemented the second step, Seize Your Time – Don’t Manage It. This will lead to some significant achievements on your part. You will be able to work on forward looking projects that will move your group ahead. After a bit, you will be able to recommend that your reports apply all three rules to their own work.

1. see Chapter 2 – What Can I Contribute? in his book The Effective Executive

No Significant Differences between Stars and Average in Intelligence, Problem-solving or Technical Skills

So it was with some anticipation that I read through Robert E. Kelley’s  How to Be a Star at Work: 9 Breakthrough Strategies You Need to Succeed (Three Rivers Press, 1999).  This book is based on research at Bell Labs in the 1980s, and 3M a bit later, on the differences between “stars” and average managers.  . Learning to be an effective manager is a multi-disciplinary-multi-modal effort. Clearly an important step is to understand what constitutes the approaches, practices, and skills of an effective manager. Based on work with hundreds of managers, Kelley found that there was no significant difference between “star” and average managers in their raw intelligence, problem solving skills, and technical skill attributes.This may seem surprising until you remember that accomplishing real results in the business world is not a based on individual performance but on the collective efforts of a whole organization. There are almost no significant business problems (or technical ones, too) that can be solved by a single individual. In fact, it is the job of a manager to bring together all of the resources required to achieve real results, focus them on the task and push, pull, inveigle, cajole, lead, or any other verb that describes the persuading that goes on to organize groups in action to achieve real results. Viewed from this perspective it seems less surprising that being a “star” manager has more to do with attributes other than raw intelligence, problem-solving, and technical knowledge.

Better Strategies and Skills in nine areas

What Kelley did find was that the stars has better strategies and skills in nine areas:

1. Initiative – working the white spaces of the organization
2. Networking – knowing who knows what in the company’
3. Self-management – managing your whole life at work
4. Getting the big picture
5. Followership – checking your ego at the door and leading in assists
6. Teamwork
7. Leadership – doing small-”l” leadership in a big”L”world
8. Organizational savvy
9. Show-and-Tell: persuading your audience with the right message

There is some overlap among these nine strategies. For instance Followership, Teamwork, and Small “l” leadership are clearly interdependent ideas. But I do not want to quible here. If you compare this list with the attributes of high performance organizations you will find useful correlations and synergies.

This book is widely available through your local library and from bookstores local and online.

1. see Henry Mintzberg, Managers Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development, 1st ed. (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2004) for more on this.

She told me about one person who has been with the firm for eight years. The owner described this person as the most professional and reliable person in the organization. She performs all sorts of important customer-facing activities flawlessly. This employee is a key person in the organization. The owner went on to tell me about a recent conversation she had with this key person who confided that she did not want to be just an “insurance geek”. She was emphatic about this. The owner told me that this statement jived with other comments this person had made recently. She believed her and felt that her days are numbered.

The owner then went on to describe how she had begun to put together a job manual for all of the key tasks now under the wing of the key employee. This seemed to me to be just the right step. First, the key employee was cooperating in constructing the job manual. This is a great sign of continuing good faith. Second, the owner is testing out the manual to be sure that it really will be a solid platform for training a replacement.

So, all of this struck me as good, sound steps to take. When I asked whether there might be another position in the firm that would be suitable for the key person, she said no, firmly. Well then, I asked, have you taken steps to find a replacement? The owner gave me a slightly surprised answer of no.

I said to the owner that if we had a video of these preceding three minutes of conversation, almost every manager would say, “It is inevitable that this key person will leave. Why wait around to take action only when you a presented with a fait accompli and have no replacement ready to go for these important tasks?

After a moment of surprise and, I think, self-recognition that this was right, she promised that she would take action. Time will tell. It is in fact very hard to essentially push someone out the door on your time schedule. It seems easier to allow events to roll along and then be surprised when the person actually leaves. Part of the difficulty is that we do not like to hurt someone. And, pushing them out the door, even when we rationally know that they will leave, seems hurtful.

A bit of re-framing is in order here.

First, the key person in this case is also doubtlessly struggling with the decision to leave. She knows that  “she did not want to be just an “insurance geek”.” But, like most, she is struggling with moving on from a comfortable, known environment where she is valued as a “key” person. On your side of the equation, you feel a desire to avoid the “hurtful” act of firing her, pushing her out the door you know that she will inevitably exit. The re-framing step is to understand that you are not doing her a favor by not acting on the shared knowledge that it is time for her to move on in her life. In the guise of avoiding hurting her you are actually aiding her own avoidance of the step away from the company. And, you are setting yourself up for a disturbing, if not destructive, void in the personnel of the company.

It is very likely that by extending the willingness of this key person to help with the job manual to actually training her replacement, you can create an environment in which a much happier and productive close to this person’s tenure can be made. Time will tell.