A Manager's Guide to Leading
a Team - (Part 1 - Are you one of them or one of us?)
One of the most common discussion points from talking to
managers on our corporate development programmes is around
dealing with being ‘the meat in the sandwich’. They are under
downward pressure to ‘get people performing’, ‘or to get
things sorted’ and upward pressure to support their teams
against the senior management ‘They’. 'They' cannot be
serious; 'They' don’t really understand what’s going on etc.
In this ‘organisational no mans land’ you as a manager need to
be very careful about defining and managing your role. Are you
one of ‘them’ or one of ‘us?’ Not maintaining a clear position
can make you look incompetent to your superiors and/or weak to
your teams.
- How should you position yourself?
- Change Management
- Representing the company for good or bad
How should you position yourself?
Simply as a communication conduit seems one of the safest. At
least this enables you to deal with any negative response by
saying 'hey don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger'. The
problem with this approach is it makes your role an
essentially passive one. Management might as well have sent
the change by email. When teams hear their leader pass on
information in a way that absolves that leader of
responsibility, you can bet you are not viewed as a leader,
more like a corporate mouthpiece.
Change Management
The key question superiors have in their minds when they ask
you to implement change is 'Can you carry your team on this
issue?' There is a change in policy, strategy or tactics, 'can
you get your team quickly committed (not just compliant) to
these new ways of working?'
If you are going to do more than pass on the information, the
major mental hurdle you need to overcome is to do with
integrity. Do you personally believe in this change of plan?
If you do, that's fine, you can then sell it with conviction,
look your team in the eye and carry the argument. But what if
you don't believe in it? In this position it is critical that
firstly you argue the case behind closed doors with your
manager(s). If they can be persuaded to change, great, if not
you have a judgement call to make. If it is something very
serious to your personal value set where you believe the line
has been crossed and you are compromised, then you may have to
consider your position. More likely, it's something you can
live with, but disagree on. Now leadership must be
demonstrated, you must sell it as if you are committed to it.
Be prepared for the direct challenge 'OK boss, we understand
we have to do it, but can I ask (perhaps off the record), what
do you really think of the idea?.' An integrity test. Do you
stay true to your personal feelings and (again perhaps off the
record) tell your team what you really think? Or (with
conviction) promote the company line?
Representing the company for good or bad
Given the previously covered two points, you promote the
company line. If you do anything else you will look weak.
Siding with your team against the company line is always a bad
idea in the medium term. You are representing the company for
good or bad; as a manager that is what you are employed to do.
Working hard behind the scenes to change things for the better
is great, but with your team, whatever the outcome, you always
support the line. When one manager in a client of ours worked
hard at this but finally resigned over several large issues
(one ethical), it came as no surprise to her team, not because
she had been always joining their side of the argument, but
because they knew she was a person of principle. This view
developed not from somebody that always supported them, they
often disagreed, but was somebody they 'always trusted and
respected' - their words not ours.
It is not a manager's job to be liked or to be feared, but to
be effective. Effectiveness means success, and everybody likes
being successful. When a manager delivers personal, team and
company-wide success, from a values-based perspective, respect
and credibility will follow.
If your team are clear about the way you behave towards them,
what about your superiors? In our experience the way managers
are treated is by no means uniform. Passive, survival based
managers are given a lot less discretion than managers who
always have a strongly argued point of view, based on a
coherent approach to how they communicate with their teams.
Realpolitik and values based leadership should not be viewed
as mutually exclusive. Pragmatism and ethics can co-exist, as
long as the manager has a clear perspective on where their
'values line' is. In dealing with managers, organisations
(almost unconsciously) work out where that line is and respect
it. This means the manager gets treated accordingly, as
somebody that needs to be dealt with professionally, who will
push back, but always will adopt company responsibility and be
accountable for carrying their team. Somebody definitely worth
having around.
Another thing the manager does is challenge the concept of
'they' or 'the company'. This lazy behaviour is a way of
displacing responsibility for what is going on. The first
thing a manager would say to a team who talked in this way is,
'please understand, I am one of the 'they', in the same way as
you are too. Inclusiveness undermines low ownership, and
encourages high accountability. We is where the mind-set
should be focused.
You cannot be the meat in the sandwich if there is no
distinction between where the bread ends and the filling
starts.
Read Part 2 of Leading a Team -
where does leadership fit in?
If you would like to pick up on any of the themes in this
overview or talk more specifically about any organisational
change issues facing you please contact:
Lynn Joy
e: lynnj@predaptive.com
t: +44 (0) 1789 734333
f: +44 (0) 1789 734401
<Back |
