Communication and Management: Knowing where to set the balance between good cop, bad cop is a difficult balance for a manager to get right

 

Knowing where to set the balance between good cop, bad cop is a difficult balance for a manager to get right

 Defining an outline of standards of which the organisation’s members are to live up to is what the art of management is often understood to consist of. That, and using the right balance of carrot and stick to get the desired results from employees. In practice, however the ambition level that you define for others to live up will tend to have a limited impact on their actual performance. Particularly in multicultural work environments, it often risks belittling people if they are held out to feel insufficient in the light of targets they can’t achieve. This is even in cases where they have actually performed at the very top of their potential. The consequence is that instead of maximising potential it stunts and demoralises team members. 

Unquestionably, pushing the limits by setting high expectations is a must. Knowing how to be inspirational and optimistic is pitted against the need for being critical and realistic to an organisation’s weaknesses. To be effective as a leader, it is imperative to have a very accurate estimation of what the actual potential really is. That can be very tricky. Having enough empathy to inspire the confidence that allows the lines of communication throughout a company to offer an undistorted reflection of what the key factors and issues are that determine performance. This skill is not so much about being the most intelligent with superior analytical abilities. It is more valuable to be in touch with and have the trust of the organisation to get the relevant information to analyse. 

On the one hand I see the diagnosis of this problem being a matter of interpersonal skills. One needs understanding and empathy to both see and be told of the real situation being faced by those on the frontlines. While it is very easy for anyone to relate to the concept of a person born with exceptional talent and motivation, we are very reluctant to see any person as having inherent constraints to his abilities. We rather excuse any/every shortcoming with a blanket explanation of being a matter of education. While many like to see this is an expression of tolerance, it is rather the reason for miscommunication and severe miscalculations of expected outcomes from mismatching the required competencies with the task at hand.

 On the other hand, I see these types of disconnects in organisations as the consequence of an ingrained legacy from colonial times. The common idea is that any manager needs to uphold an image of superior knowledge compared to the others in his team. This quickly becomes a handicap in that communication is stilted in fear of revealing uncertainty and doubt. I see this mindset as probably stemming from the entrenched ways of how colonies were managed. Organisational structures were impeccably designed to monitor and micro-manage labour that carried out minutely standardised tasks. A consequence and requisite for these multilayered hierarchies was distancing between those in power from those carrying out the work. 

Today, this kind of approach is rarely beneficial to any activity besides the possible exception of assembly lines. Yet, the same thinking is seen all over the world. Standards are still being mistaken for standardisation.

 The reality of the marketplace today is that companies are more dependent than ever on a diversity of talents if they are to compete. And for talents to flourish, a degree of trust is required to shift from an environment shackled in conformity to one of freedom that makes creativity possible. Power, as with mastery of any art, is revealed in the control one has without having to resort to frameworks and monitoring. 

A good sign of organisational health is where being fault and blame-free is deemed as lacking initiative and not as a virtue. 

Oscar Wendel is the conference manager of Construction Week.