In the eternal debate on the role of the manager, I would like to shed some light based on my experience, give everyone the credit they deserve in the success and smooth running of the business and put everyone, manager and employee, in their place.
The role of the manager is not to pose in the photo
We might as well start with what is now commonly known as an unpopular opinion: today, being a manager is seen more as a status than a role.
While it should practically be seen as a change of career or even profession (instead of making and thinking about my success, I create the conditions for the success of others), it is often seen as an achievement (I have reached the top of the mountain and I am going to take a breather and enjoy the view).
It is not necessarily the manager’s fault. After all, it is often the company that has promoted an expert who does not know what it means to be a manager and often does not want to be one, and who will therefore continue to do what he knows how to do: be on the ground every day as a contributor and not as a manager, and enjoy the prestige of the position the rest of the time. Moreover, in internal events, we rarely praise a particular team that has done an exceptional job, and even less so its members. We highlight so-and-so’s team, and it is so-and-so who goes on stage to be congratulated. So-and-so is very important in this kind of communication.
Many employees therefore rightly complain about their manager: he continues to be a producer like any other, doing his job but without fulfilling his role as a manager except when he is asked to act as such and where, after the joy of appearing in the photo with the “status” people, he ends up being pointed at because his team is not performing well enough.
Being an manager is a real profession or, rather, should be (Is manager still a profession?) but no one has ever really tried to formalize its content, acting as if it were innate and without understanding that, like a business as an organization, it is at the service of its employees and not the other way around (If everything becomes a service, why not businesses?)
The employees on the field are the reason for all the success
Of course it’s always nice to be credited for the performance of your team and I’m no exception to the rule. In any case, when congratulations are being distributed by the right people, only the team leader is in the room, and it’s up to him not to forget to pass on the information.
But at that moment you must always have the humility or even the honesty to point out that it was the team members who did the work, that you were just content to make things possible (A manager is someone who makes things happen). Of course it’s a crucial role, but it’s useless without the team… in the same way that the team has trouble moving forward and improving if you don’t create the right context and unblock certain things.
Moreover, even if you manage to profoundly transform your team and the way it works, you only owe this success to its members because they have followed (Improving a team’ s work: a story of continuous improvement and Change and transformation need a new approach).
But in the end, a manager alone is useless, whereas the team can survive and get by without him for a while. Imperfectly, yes, but it will be able to get by..
In praise of managerial humility
One day when we were discussing the subject in the Executive Committee, I said something which, to my great surprise, was agreed with by a few people. I can assure you that it wasn’t the majority, but as they were the only two people to whom I reported, it suited me.
In fact, my reasoning was in three parts.
“If we decide tonight, all of us in this room, to take a fortnight’s vacation without warning and without organizing the vacation, the business is not going to die”.
I even think that it won’t be noticeable for the first few days. Then decisions won’t be made, trade-offs won’t be made, structuring projects won’t be launched, financing won’t be granted, the relationship with key contacts at customers and partners will be cut off and little by little the organization will lose speed, zigzag, flirt with going off the road.
When we return after a fortnight, we will find things to repair and, if things are against us, there may be irreparable damage in some places, but I doubt that the survival of the business will be at stake.
“If middle management decides to do the same thing, we will see problems before the end of the week, or even in the middle of it”.
This is where the daily organization of the teams will be affected. The decisions not taken, the trade-offs not made, the lack of direction will be felt closer to the production side, closer to the customer, with less long-term strategic impact but a very concrete managerial and operational impact in the short term.
When they return at the end of the week, I think they will be frightened by the mountain of problems to be solved, the damage to be repaired and sometimes the almost irremediable consequences of their absence.
“If, on the other hand, it is the people on the field who leave for a week, we could die in the days to come”.
After all, it depends on your size, your sector, your financial health, but if on a Monday morning we find ourselves without anyone to work and produce, we will feel the impact that very evening, or even after a few hours.
Customers who no longer have anyone to talk to, internal and external projects that are not progressing, operations at a standstill.
You are not selling anything, producing anything or earning anything, even though the costs are there.
Big loss of profitability, unavoidable delays, loss of customer confidence… you can see the picture.
Yes, when a business moves forward, it is thanks to the people on the field.
Managers are there to do the dirty work
So what are managers and executives there for? It’s all in the previous sentences.
Deciding, arbitrating, allocating and resources, unblocking things, engaging teams and solving other people’s problems.
For those who like status and posing for photos, it’s called the dirty work, for those with a managerial streak, it’s everything we love.
But you have to know how to draw the consequences.
The employee serves the customer, the manager and the business serve the employee, and the managers serve the managers (Do you have a delivery model for management?). Above all, never forget the customer in the equation because that justifies the essential logic (Can we turn the pyramid upside down without the customer?).
When things go well, it’s because everyone has done their job, but it’s important to remember that it’s thanks to the employees that this becomes a reality: the managers have only made things possible, but without the employees nothing happens.
But if anything goes wrong, it’s the fault of the managers and the directors. It’s not blaming them to say this, just reminding them of their role and their responsibility. When things go wrong, it is 96% because of the system and 4% because of the employees, Deming told us (The Problem Isn’t the Employee, It’s the System), and it is up to the managers to take care of the system. These figures remind us once again that the employees are to be credited for what goes well and that what goes wrong is the responsibility of the managers.
Once again, I want to be clear about what I’m saying: if something goes wrong, it’s not the manager’s fault, but they are responsible for making sure it stops (Just because work is invisible, it doesn’t mean that it can’t be improved).
I know that looking after people, reviewing the organization and processes, being committed to operational excellence and continuous improvement, basically getting your hands dirty not as a contributor but as a manager is seen as the dirty work, that many say that if they have got to this point it is not because they wanted to do plumbing but that it is the nature of their role.
It is the real operational side of the manager’s role and not just being a contributor like any member of their team with managerial responsibilities on top of which they balk.
In fact, a manager who does not want to be responsible for problems and their resolution is ultimately part of the problem.
Bottom line
Of course, a manager should be judged on the performance of his teams. While this is not the be-all and end-all (What is managerial performance and its hidden side?), it is the basis.
However, it is not enough. A manager must also be held responsible for what goes wrong, he must be evaluated or rewarded on his ability to instill a mindset of continuous improvement, to solve human and especially organizational problems rather than merely observing them.
The manager must not be just another contributor to his team, like an inspector of finished works who is content to read the meters.
He is responsible for everything that goes wrong, must consider himself the chief manager of transformation within his perimeter, must take the blame for dysfunctions and, on the contrary, be rewarded when he tackles them because this is his main role in the success of others.
And of course, executives as supreme managers also have their obligations in this sense, at the service of managers.
Manager is definitely not a status and requires skills that have nothing to do with the team’s profession.
Image: problem solving by CuteCute via Shutterstock
