What Style Do You Use to Manage Change?

Are you or your people getting what's needed when there's an organizational change?

Earlier this month I was working with a manager who had gotten some feedback from his boss. He was told that he didn't jump in alongside his people to get new projects and improvements off the ground. As a result, things weren't getting done on schedule. So I asked him why he managed from a distance. His response:

"My people are long time employees. They're highly educated and have a lot of experience. If I start managing too closely, they'll lose their motivation."

I'm thinking,"What motivation? Apparently they aren't getting much done!

His approach to the situation isn't at all unusual, is it? We live in a time when managers are getting messages that say they should be consultative and participative. OK. But what happens when the work group doesn't know what to do our how to do it?

When there is a change, people want clear, strong direction. We all want to know what, where, when, why, and then, if the situation warrants it, how. Think about it: when we face the unknown, we start to get a little insecure. What do we look for? Direction. Strong leadership. Clarity. Help.

It has nothing to do with longevity or advanced degrees. It has to do with diagnosing the willingness and ability of the people and then adjusting management style accordingly.

In the case of my manager friend, he used misguided assumptions instead of proven research in his initial approach.

How to Manage?

Meet People Where They Are

I'm a big proponent of Situational Leadership and have been since it was introduced. Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard teamed up to introduce the practical application of the Ohio State Studies (Go Buckeyes)! Some bloggers who have touched on Situational Leadership are Business Pundit, Innovative Leadership Blog, and Changing Minds.

The principle is this: Before you know how close to manage or how consultative to be with your people, you need to know where their willingness and ability is in relation to the task at hand. The less people know, the closer you manage. The more mature and effective they become, the less you have to direct and the more consultative you can be.

If you've ever taught a child to ride a bike, then think of that as the model. When they start, you have to demonstrate, help them on the bicycle, hold onto them, and not leave their side. As they get a little confidence and are able to go a short distance on their own, maybe you jog alongside if you have to catch them. When you see them smiling and riding a block or so on their own, you shout encouragement. And when they disappear from view; well, yell "I'm going to the house for a cup of coffee." That way they'll know where you are if they need you.

Managing people is a constant series of diagnoses and appropriate responses. It's never all of one thing. And it's never all direction or abdication. It's what people need from you in order to move along the performance curve.

And just to emphasize the point once more: Change=More Managerial Direction. Any manager who is introducing something new has to be prepared to work closer and harder than normal.

What's your experience? Are you giving or getting the right thing at the right time?

Photo Source: www.situational.com

Comments

[Viji]

Well said Steve, I practically see this at my place. Some are pro and some are against this policy. But I do agree, when you work closely you get better results. Great Post. Viji

[peter vajda]

Hi Steve,

You write: "Before you know how close to manage or how consultative to be with your people, you need to know where their willingness and ability is in relation to the task at hand. The less people know, the closer you manage. The more mature and effective they become, the less you have to direct and the more consultative you can be."

I might reword this to read:
"Before you know how close to manage or how consultative to be with your people, you first need to know yourself, i.e, your conscious willingness and ability in relation to your task at hand. The less you know yourself, the less you really know others. The more emotionally mature and effective you become, the less you choose to or need to direct, micromanage,or distrust others and the more consultative you can be, the more in "servant mode" you can be. So, how do you self-manage and self-regulate and how self-responsible are you in managing your tasks and your life at work?

[Steve Roesler]

Peter,

The "know thyself" is certainly sage advice--and, I dare say, another of your wonderful starting points for a future post!

Providing direction is quite different from micromanaging and distrust. In this case, direction means that a manager is very clear about the task, ensures that people have--or get--the necessary skills, and provides context for commitment.

[Steve Roesler]

Hi, Viji,

You just reminded me of something (thank you!) about leadership and management in different cultures. As you know, I used to live and work in the Middle East. Some of the variations of Situational Leadership don't fit well because of cultural considerations.