Jul. 14, 2018 "9 common complaints by employees about their leaders": Today I found this article by Harvey Schachter in the Globe and Mail:
Do you know your strengths as a leader? What about your flaws?
Most leaders feel they have a good sense of both.
But consultants Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman say 360-degree surveys show that executives with very low scores in one or more areas are often completely oblivious to their fatal flaws. And the reality is that 30 per cent of executives have such low scores.
This goes beyond weaknesses. Everyone has weaknesses, the consultants note, but after administering assessments to thousands of leaders, they found that most of the time mild weaknesses don’t affect a person’s overall effectiveness.
Fatal flaws are extreme weaknesses that can have a dramatic negative effect, hampering your contribution to the organization and career progress. “Everyone else can see this clearly, but the person with the fatal flaw almost never does. And here, that blindness has a steep cost,” they write in Harvard Business Review.
Fatal flaws are extreme weaknesses that can have a dramatic negative effect, hampering your contribution to the organization and career progress. “Everyone else can see this clearly, but the person with the fatal flaw almost never does. And here, that blindness has a steep cost,” they write in Harvard Business Review.
There’s a one-in-three chance this is about you. Those are worrisome odds.
To help, the consultants suggest finding a “truth teller.” Another course might be to look at common managerial flaws and see if they might be a sore point for you as well. Here are nine to start with, from a Harris Interact online poll that came up with the top nine complaints by employees about their leaders:
- Not recognizing employee achievements, cited by 63 per cent
- Not giving clear directions, 57 per cent
- Not having time to meet with employees, 52 per cent
- Refusing to talk to subordinates, 51 per cent
- Taking credit for others’ ideas, 47 per cent
- Not offering constructive criticism, 39 per cent
- Not knowing employees’ names, 36 per cent
- Refusing to talk to people on the phone or in person, 34 per cent
- Not asking about employees’ lives outside work, 23 per cent
It’s a stunning list. Not knowing employees’ names? Refusing to talk to people? Interact suggests it’s about emotional intelligence, but it seems even more basic than that – inept communication (or just overall ineptness).
How did these people become managers? Are there simple transgressions like that which, in a rush, you commit?
How did these people become managers? Are there simple transgressions like that which, in a rush, you commit?
I’ve just been reading Doris Kearns Goodwin’s fascinating book, The Bully Pulpit, a joint biography of Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and some of the muckraking journalists of their era.
Taft was an extraordinarily genial man; people seemed to always remark on his likeability, from an early age, and always classified him as more convivial than anybody else. When he succeeded Roosevelt as president, however, he messed up in naming his cabinet, unable – presumably because of that genial approach – to tell people their fate, notably holdovers from the Roosevelt cabinet.
Taft was an extraordinarily genial man; people seemed to always remark on his likeability, from an early age, and always classified him as more convivial than anybody else. When he succeeded Roosevelt as president, however, he messed up in naming his cabinet, unable – presumably because of that genial approach – to tell people their fate, notably holdovers from the Roosevelt cabinet.
We think of leaders’ ham-handedness with others as coming from arrogance and personal ego or their very driven nature. But Taft, whose geniality suggests high emotional intelligence, flopped at handling difficult conversations.
That genial attitude, of course, can lead to ducking such conversations, but also might lead to a passive-aggressive approach, avoiding tough conversations or, in frustration, taking too strong a voice in them, particularly under pressure from superiors. That may help to explain how some managerial ineptness occurs: out of a desire to be everyone’s friend, rather than to lord power over others.
That genial attitude, of course, can lead to ducking such conversations, but also might lead to a passive-aggressive approach, avoiding tough conversations or, in frustration, taking too strong a voice in them, particularly under pressure from superiors. That may help to explain how some managerial ineptness occurs: out of a desire to be everyone’s friend, rather than to lord power over others.
Scott Gregory, CEO of Hogan Assessment Systems, says in Harvard Business Review that the key derailment characteristics of bad managers are well documented and fall into three broad categories of behaviour:
- Moving-away behaviors, which create distance from others through hyper-emotionality, diminished communication, and skepticism, which erodes trust;
- Moving-against behaviors, in which the manager overpowers and manipulates other people while aggrandizing himself or herself;
- Moving-toward behaviors, which includes being ingratiating, overly conforming, and reluctant to take chances or stand up for one’s team.
He says the most common type of incompetent leader – and we may see it reflected in the nine complaints chronicled by Harris Interact – is the absentee leader. “Absentee leaders are people in leadership roles who are psychologically absent from them.
They were promoted into management and enjoy the privileges and rewards of a leadership role, but avoid meaningful involvement with their teams.”
They were promoted into management and enjoy the privileges and rewards of a leadership role, but avoid meaningful involvement with their teams.”
Research shows that being ignored by one’s boss is more alienating than being treated poorly, he notes. But these folks continue to manage because they don’t overtly create waves, so their bosses focus on more egregious managerial behaviour.
You may know people who fit this pattern. But that’s not my point. Do you fit that pattern, and possibly have a blind spot that allows you to ignore this fatal flaw?
Cannonballs
- The common advice is to work on our weaknesses or flaws and eliminate them. Another avenue might be to partner with somebody who can compensate, whose strengths complement your weaknesses and vice-versa. If you manage others, perhaps think about that when it comes to promotions and assignments.
- Here’s a subtle blind spot to which trainer David Mattson urges you to be alert: Do you create learned helplessness by trying to solve every issue raised by your staff?
- Look in the mirror, not out the window, when apportioning blame for poor performance, advises Good to Great author Jim Collins.
An employer/manager/boss needs to know what they are talking about. There are a lot of bosses who have no clue what their employees actually do. They therefore hire managers who also know nothing so the people on the bottom who do the actual work are the only ones who know how to do what the company does.
Professional managers say that it doesn't matter what the company does, the basic principles of management are the same. That is so wrong.
Truly successful managers have a profound knowledge of what the company does. They are able to judge the performance of the workers and managers under them, and are able to offer specific help if required.
They are also much more resistant to BS and can truly judge if a manager is competent.I have worked for way too many incompetent managers who only got hired because they can run a meeting or give good eye contact, but are unable to make good decisions because they don't know enough about what the company does.
Professional managers say that it doesn't matter what the company does, the basic principles of management are the same. That is so wrong.
Truly successful managers have a profound knowledge of what the company does. They are able to judge the performance of the workers and managers under them, and are able to offer specific help if required.
They are also much more resistant to BS and can truly judge if a manager is competent.I have worked for way too many incompetent managers who only got hired because they can run a meeting or give good eye contact, but are unable to make good decisions because they don't know enough about what the company does.
This is a complaint?
Not asking about employees’ lives outside work, 23 per cent.
I really can't be bothered sharing any of my personal life with a so called leader or manager.
Work and personal life are separate in my world.
Not asking about employees’ lives outside work, 23 per cent.
I really can't be bothered sharing any of my personal life with a so called leader or manager.
Work and personal life are separate in my world.
A culturally diverse work force is considered a critical element in the success of any modern company looking to compete in the global economy.
The accepted theory is that a diversity of perspectives in the workplace allows for better decision-making and brings more creativity and innovation to the table. That, in turn, translates into better products and services and, critically, a healthier bottom line.
But Luciara Nardon, associate professor of international business at Carleton University’s Sprott School of Business in Ottawa, believes it’s a mistake to assume that just putting people from different cultures together in a room is enough.
Rather, to leverage diversity, “it is important to allow individuals to go through a process of developing enough common ground to act as a foundation for a working relationship,” says Ms. Nardon in an e-mail.
She defines common ground as a set of mutually known, but not necessarily shared, knowledge, beliefs and assumptions about what is acceptable or desirable (and what isn’t).
Creating common ground takes time. It requires developing the communication tools to achieve a mutual understanding of the current purpose.
It may mean asking clarifying questions (such as “Where do you want to meet for lunch and at what time?”) or providing more detailed information (“I am having lunch at 11:30 a.m. at the cafeteria downstairs). It can also require the creation of a more formal process of inquiry and advocacy.
It may mean asking clarifying questions (such as “Where do you want to meet for lunch and at what time?”) or providing more detailed information (“I am having lunch at 11:30 a.m. at the cafeteria downstairs). It can also require the creation of a more formal process of inquiry and advocacy.
But it is critical to understanding what we can expect from each other.
“The more we get to know a co-worker or business partner, the more personalized this common ground will become and the cultural background of that person will become less important. Instead of relying on national stereotypes, such as, ‘Mexicans have a different perspective on punctuality,’ we may know that Carlos tends to be on time for meetings, while Ana tends to be a few minutes late,” Ms. Nardon says.
“Trying to take shortcuts will either eliminate the benefits of diversity because a majority group will impose their views, or we will result in a dysfunctional workgroup that does not reach its potential.”
Ms. Nardon explores workplace diversity in her new book Working in a Multicultural World: A Guide to Developing Intercultural Competence (University of Toronto Press).
The relative ease of global travel, combined with the advent of collaborative technologies such as Google Docs and Google Hangouts that let people connect in real time regardless of their location, have created a new dynamic in how — and how often — we communicate across cultures. For many workers, a cross-cultural experience whether in person or online is a regular occurrence.
Yet, so much of the literature and corporate training programs addressing culture are based on an outdated model in which a few executives relocate to work abroad.
“Today, that’s not the reality,” Ms. Nardon says in her book. “You may be going to Japan and working with the Japanese, but you get there and you figure out you are actually working with a Chinese person who is an expatriate in Japan, and you are in a project with somebody from Argentina.
“There are so many different ways intercultural interactions happen.”
It’s important business leaders understand that, without adequate strategies in place, cultural ambiguity can lead to misunderstanding and conflict sparked by culturally rooted differences, such as aggressiveness in negotiation. Among the negative results is that tasks can take much longer to complete.
Leaders, managers and workers alike need a new set of communications skills, Ms. Nardon says.
The book lays out the steps to creating a workable strategy. But not every change is as tangible.
“It’s about learning more about ourselves. We can develop an acute awareness of how our own culture influences our thoughts, perspectives and behaviours,” Ms. Nardon says.
That self-awareness will allow us to develop the skills we need to communicate our own views and perspectives in ways that are constructive. And that, she says, promises big returns for everyone.
“When you are in a highly diverse environment, your performance will be dependent on you interacting with people from different cultures, so developing the competence to interact with different cultures will help you do your job.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/careers/business-education/article-how-to-reduce-conflict-and-boost-collaboration-in-a-multicultural-work/
I thought that "diversity" was the cure-all for everything.
Here's an idea. Have the company vote on which of the diverse groups is the most marginalized and let them make all the decisions.
Try this in Korea or China ! Ha!!! Snowflakes....
No comments:
Post a Comment