People leave Managers not Companies
Early in my career, I resigned from a fantastic management position because I could no longer have a professional relationship with my manager. I didn’t want to leave, the company had been extremely good to me, they invested in me and took a risk by giving me a major project at a young age. There was no doubt that I was destined for greater things. Yet, stressed and not wanting to - I resigned. Why? Because I had a manager I no longer trusted, and with whom I could not maintain a professional relationship.
During my career, I lost very few team members, so I consider that I was doing something right. Yet when the question is put to people “what do you think about your manager?” a whopping 80% of people surveyed replied that they think their manager is incompetent. Then there are employees who are dissatisfied with their jobs, feeling economically trapped, angry, frustrated, and unable to better their situation.
A research study on American employees from Gallup found that 50% resign due to bad management. The study continues to show that having a ‘bad’ boss creates unhappiness in the office, adding stress and spreading negativity to their home life and families. Finally, workers feel like they’re given little guidance as to what’s expected of them.
The cause of all this dissatisfaction
It may stretch back to the early 1880s and the Industrial Revolution were cotton mills enforced a type of control we know today as the Traditional management model, also called the command-and-control structure — a term referring to keeping subordinates in line. This management approach, based on the hierarchical and often brutal British military and naval traditions, typically involved the development and implementation of strict rules of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour with harsh consequences for breaking the rules. The Traditional approach underwent a refinement in the 1920s and another after WWII bringing about the management model that dominates many of today’s organisations.
Under the traditional model, a manager’s job is to plan, organise staff, direct and control. They are largely autocratic and sometimes viewed as intimidating and can rule with compulsion, force, control and secrecy. They command respect through seniority and years of service and will in extreme circumstances use physical, psychological, and economic force. They set expectations for the employees below them who need to meet certain goals, but the manager receives the reward for achieving those goals. These managers also tend to experience a frequent turnover of employees, they do not always welcome new ideas and are often unaware of problems amongst their team members.
Employees working for Traditional managers are often dissatisfied with their jobs and are unhappy with managers who provide little or no support and motivation. They are growing frustrated at not having input into their work and they frequently leave when better opportunities arise. Employees are insisting on higher levels of job satisfaction and want their managers to be open and honest, fair and reasonable, and to value them and their contributions.
Common reasons why people resign
Poor management
Lack of advancement
Insufficient remuneration
Boredom, low job satisfaction
Poor workplace culture, lack of respect
Better opportunity
Common descriptions of most managers
Incompetent
Poor communicator
Poor listener
Rude, abrupt, arrogant, humiliating
Shows no interest
Common descriptions about bad managers employees
Incompetent
Lazy
Will not follow directions or procedures
Show no interest
Common attributes of poor organizations
See their employees as units of labour, easily replaceable and not worth investing in.
Inferior at training their mid-level managers, preferring instead to invest in leadership training for senior executives.
Vests a lot of power in individual managers, allowing them to impose their form of control, rules, and regulations just as long as they achieve business goals imposed on them from above
Managers are intimidating people in positions of power who are coercive, dictatorial and distrusting.
What are today’s employees demanding?
Today’s generation of employees unlike the Baby Boomers before them are vocal about what they want their workplace to look like, they will not accept the old-style methods of the traditional model which they view as managing, administering, stifling, unreasonable and unwarranted. They want managers who recognise them for their efforts, who work in a collaborative, supportive and motivational manner. They want a say in how the workplace is managed, where free-thinking, empowerment and service and community are put ahead of self-interest. Progressive management styles and High-Performance Teams are perfect for them, they fulfil their willingness and desire to work across teams, as well as their constant need for feedback, reinforcement and praise for their being tech-savvy. No matter how they are viewed, the simple truth is that the new generation looks at work dramatically different than the generation that immediately preceded them.
Today, progressive organisations are leading the way in respect of how they view leadership and people management; it is these organisations that are making the move to progressive and transformational management styles and use of High-Performance Teams. I will leave you with this question to ponder: Do you want to work (or have your children work) in a traditionally managed organisation where personal and professional opportunity is limited or delayed? Or would you rather work in a progressive organisation that values people as their greatest asset and employs transformational and high-performance management methods?
The effects of different management styles
The Traditional Copycat Manager
These are managers who have received no supervisory or management training and who have been subjected to traditional managers as their management role models. Not knowing any better, they simply copy the traditional management style believing this is what the path to success looks like. These managers success, attitudes and approach to their employees is largely based upon their personalities as against any management acumen. Some can be extremely effective whilst many are not, they are the principal cause of most employee dissatisfaction.
The Reluctant Manager
There are two types, the first is the manager who is appointed based on seniority or years of service where capability can be irrelevant - it is simply a matter of who is next in line. The second is managers who did not want to be a manager but accepted or applied for a management position for the pay or prestige. These managers fundamentally lack any management potential, they are usually angry and frustrated, have great difficulty in influencing and motivating others causing them to be autocratic. Again, they are a source of employee dissatisfaction.
The Progressive Manager
These are managers who have adopted one of the newer management styles (`1980s to 2000) such as Servant, Democratic, Participative or Collaborative. Progressive managers have known for decades that the Traditional, hierarchical pyramid management style is outdated as it does not suit today’s fast-moving environment, nor does it suit today’s employees. Its rigidity cannot support agility, speed, or engagement, and then there is the troubling aspect of vesting of too much (sometimes abusive) power in managers over their employees. A progressive management style is marked by transparency and sharing information with employees where progressive leaders empower everyone. It is a leadership style that values sharing and collaboration. These managers are admired and well-liked.
The Transformational Manager
Transformational management is a standout progressive style because it is one of only two styles that can build high-performance teams. Transformational managers are change managers who are agile and who focus their efforts on pushing their team members to ever greater accomplishments through encouragement, pushing them out of their comfort zones and motivating them to do more than they thought possible. They work alongside their team members, inspiring them to ever greater efforts by demonstrating their work ethic. Transformational managers set challenging expectations and typically achieve higher performance outcomes from their teams. They manage people as valuable individuals, identifying and developing their talents. They are role models who are respected and trusted.
The High-Performance Manager
This is the second management style that builds high-performance teams. The style is described in the High-Performance Management and Teams model that is predicated on the assumption that the traditional way of managing has run its course and that increasing competition and rapid changes in technology are starting to move it into the background, favouring progressive styles in its place. The high-performance manager is also a change manager who has many Transformational management characteristics. These managers build a transitional pathway between the old Traditional management way of working and newer progressive management styles. High-Performance managers are open and honest, fair and reasonable who fully empower their team members and who value their team members’ contributions.
The High-Performance Manager is more charismatic and is an excellent motivator who inspires followers with challenge and persuasion, providing meaning and understanding; they are intellectually stimulating. They are viewed as individually considerate leaders, admired, respected and trusted with high standards of ethical and moral conduct. They actively mentor and encourage creativity with no room for public criticism. They pay special attention to each team members needs for achievement and growth, and their behaviour demonstrates acceptance of individual differences. They are highly respected, their team members would follow them off a cliff.