OilEdge: Manager - know thyself...

Quality may be a measure of output but it also describes an aspect of a person and what makes them who they are. Personal qualities are valuable and should be greatly valued by oneself and the organisation that one works for. I recently conducted research into values and discovered that people perform most happily and easily at work when they can maintain their values. People choose not to change how they are for the various situations in which they find themselves (home, social, work).

Being oneself, it appeared was important. However, people also often 'put on an act' or struggle with being themselves in managerial situations.

This is the last in a first series of articles by Kieran Maloney.

Know me, knowing you (aha)

Relationships

There are many relationships in an organisation that we, as managers will have to make work. Here I will focus on the relationship between the manager and the team but we also need to consider (coverage in articles to come) peers, our own boss and more senior people in the organisation, other functions and customers or suppliers.

One thing colleagues and I have often seen is the enactment of the belief that one must be 'best friends' with one's team members. This is an interesting conundrum as we have also seen the opposite where a team boss is deliberately harsh and apparently uncaring.

Is there an answer to this? This is probably one of the harder areas for managers to come to terms with but I have seen great examples where people have managed the relationships wonderfully and remained true to themselves. We certainly do not recommend going through a process of trying to be best friends with members of the team. It can be hard to reprimand or call to task a friend; and we need to bear in mind that this may have to happen. We may be fortunate and have people working in our team who are self controlling and do not cause these type of problems. We may equally be unfortunate enough to have friends in the team who struggle with the work or underperform, especially if we have been promoted from their ranks or if we have not had a hand in recruiting them. Hence I suggest that we retain a professional 'distance' between ourselves as manager and a team member. If the person is a friend firstly and a colleague second then we may need to explain that our role as boss applies to them as well as all others in the team (standards and expectations are universal after all). If that approach feels a bit 'heavy' then an opportunity to reinforce standards or expectations gently but fairly may be an easier and better approach. However I do maintain that you, as the manager need to draw the distinction between work and social activity. An expression I find reminds me of this is 'be a part of the team, but remain apart from the team'.

There is also the suggestion of perception. I once worked with a Group Operations Director (G.O.D.) who loved to announce himself by that acronym (God) when he attended induction programmes. To him this was a little bit of a joke and knowing him as I did I could tell this. However I could see different looks on the faces of members of his 'audience'. There were those who took it as a light-hearted comment and joke, those who were uncertain and those who really saw him as an overbearing and self inflated person. (The latter was far from the truth). When I tentatively suggested to him that calling himself God, to people who generally reported within his line of authority, was not the best idea, he shrugged and continued to call himself God. To his self perception there was nothing wrong, it was a joke, but to some recipients the perception was rather different. It is not always possible to check out others perceptions but being open to feedback and even seeking it can be very useful. Having a trusted person who can offer this feedback may be very useful…a role I hoped to perform but my colleague was too caught up in his own perception. This was ironic as he often referred to 'perception is reality' when discussing how we may come across to our customers.

The essence is to remain true to yourself and not to put on an act of either 'over friendliness' or being a dragon. Laying the law down may be appropriate with some people at the start but I believe we need to find the appropriate way in which to do it. We do not have to be the dragon if that is not our natural style and equally we do not need to be sycophantic or too friendly if that is not our natural style.

Art and Science

I have often thought that Management has two broad elements; the art and the science. The science for me is about knowing what to do but the art is about being able to apply that knowledge appropriately. The art is made easier if we relax and allow ourselves to be natural and do not try to be something we are not. That said, if our style is over familiarity with everyone this may not be appropriate in formal work situations.

My experience has been that those who are very friendly and familiar with members of the team are more likely to struggle when the going is tough and 'conversations' have to be had. Disciplining a friend is difficult. Chasing a best friend for progress or getting news from them as to why certain things are not done is more difficult than a dispassionate approach. All of this also relates to the way in which we communicate within and beyond the team.

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional Intelligence is a voguish thing to discuss but it does have relevance here. In its simplest form Emotional Intelligence is about being aware of both oneself and others. It then goes on to explore how that awareness can 'shape' interactions and relations between ourselves and others.
If you are aware of your own behaviour and that of others in the team, you may see the impact of one upon the other. So, is it best to rant and rave at someone in the team who has not done what is expected? What happens when you do? Or, what happens when you say nothing and let the team member continue to miss doing what is expected?

My own experience is that if you confront the individual or people involved it can be like that customer service representative winding up the customer: 'You did this; we are blameless; you must have done this, that or the other thing; it is your fault'. Even the mildest mannered person would be wound up by this approach.

Behaviour

In all that we have discussed already, the key word is behaviour. What we do and what we see of others is behaviour. We do not see an actual personality or character although if we and others are true to themselves their behaviour reflects their character or personality. But all we can go with and control or display ourselves is behaviour. This word may be more acceptable to many who flinch at the mention of emotion even though they may often reflect the same thing. We behave in a way that reflects our emotions such as: angry, happy, sad, frustrated, excited, engaged, bored and so on.

If we wish to display our emotions openly it may work, but it is a risky business. Thus it is probable that we will have to hide them and being aware of our emotions may result in a different output or behaviour than if we left them unchecked. This may not always be true of colleagues who will often vent their feelings openly. As a manager there are times when we may need to keep them in check.

Expectations also have an impact here. It is not comely in an English / British business setting for a man to display emotions such as sadness or love or friendship. It may surprise people however and I have seen managers use 'raw' emotion to show disappointment in a team's performance. Like wearing pink, you have to feel confident and self assured to do it.

Understanding another's behaviour or at least recognising it allows us to respond appropriately. If I use the word 'sensitivity' here it is not a soft and apparently soppy approach. I use the word sensitivity as an extension of recognition or awareness; it does, however add a human touch in that it suggests we will respond to the individual appropriately. What is appropriate? It again need not mean being best friends with the colleague, but sensitivity assumes we understand where the individual is and what is manifesting in their behaviour. We need to understand what the cause may be so using our skills of feedback and open questioning we can explore what may be 'bothering' the individual. Thence we may address the issues, if we can, or start a process of greater exploration to ensure the individual is performing well.

Managing People

I guess we are back to the art and science aspects again. Managing people often daunts people and to an extent the elaborations we have made in this series of articles makes it seem more unobtainable. That is why I urge that we all remain true to ourselves. Nobody expects us to be successful managers of people immediately (except perhaps ourselves) and whilst the science can be learnt, the art may take time to acquire. For some the art may be natural for others we need to learn it through experience and probably trial and error, unless we are fortunate enough to have a good mentor or work for a great people manager.

I recently worked with a lady who aspired to be like her former manager who intuitively 'knew' how to praise individuals in the team or how to urge them on. In my view she already had a lot of this awareness and skill herself. However, it is a rare commodity and many of us really have to work at it. Again I will emphasise the value of awareness and sensitivity. If we can cultivate those two aspects of our managerial repertoire, we will be doing ourselves, and those we manage great service.