By Daniel Bobinski
Stark differences exist among the assignments inherent to front-line workers, managers and leaders. Each level in an organization is supposed to have authority over different duties, and each area of responsibility requires different actions. That may seem like a no-brainer, but throughout every industry, some organizations exist in which people conflate the responsibilities of management and leadership. When people confuse those responsibilities, organizations are rarely as effective or efficient as they could be.
By way of review, effectiveness means moving in the best possible direction, and efficiency means doing things in a timely and cost-saving manner.
Said another way, when managers and leaders blur their lines of responsibilities, an organization may survive, but it probably won’t thrive.
The Leadership Void
The following illustration is true. The names and places have been changed to protect the innocent … and the guilty.
Alan has been at the helm of Widget Services Inc., a medium-sized company for nearly 20 years. The industry is stable and Alan’s company has seen consistent growth, but that growth is mostly due to Alan purchasing other, smaller companies. Most of the people on Alan’s leadership team have also been there a long time, with some working relationships going back 25 years.
One problem? They talk together to set goals, but plans to achieve those goals are rarely created. They hold meetings, but if a department head inquires about the status of projects in other departments, people whisper that the department head is becoming a micromanager. Because nobody wants that label, there’s not much communication about various projects.
Additionally, Alan wants people to feel like they have input into what’s going on, so he invites 15 or more people to attend meetings when only four or five are needed.
If asked, nobody in management or leadership can recite the company’s vision and mission statements. Neither can they clearly differentiate the responsibilities of managers and leaders.
To make things worse, there’s a good ol’ boys club consisting of six key people, all of whom have worked at Widget Services for at least 15 years. Every summer that clique schedules a week-long hunting trip together. Nobody else from the company is ever invited, nor are any other off-site retreats ever held.
The Person at the Top
Everyone likes Alan. He doesn’t ruffle feathers, nor does he want any conflict on his teams. Over the years, Alan has surrounded himself with many like-minded people. Walk into their building and you’ll see everyone working dutifully on projects they believe are important, and once each year they do performance reviews where raises get doled out. Plainly stated, Alan’s organization was functional, but barely so.
Enter the New Guy
A few years ago, Alan’s company acquired XYZ Inc., a small specialty company. Kevin came with that acquisition. Kevin had been a leader in XYZ Inc., and he was an advocate of clearly defined roles for managers and leaders.
As you might imagine, Kevin’s style did not blend with the rest of Alan’s team. For example:
- Kevin thought leaders should think strategically and consider suggestions for making improvements.
- He thought leaders should share status updates with each other and discuss how to prevent potential threats from slowing them down – and that inquiring about such things was not micromanagement.
- He thought leaders should be creating deadlines for the goals they set and expecting everyone to know what their deliverables were, as well as when they should be delivered.
Kevin also had expectations for managers.
- He thought managers should know the strengths and blind spots of each person on their team and do things that increase esprit de corps.
- He thought managers should explore with others ways to speed up production without sacrificing quality or safety.
- He thought managers should be helping those on their teams understand the entire workflow process, not just laser-focus on the team’s assigned tasks.
Bumps in the Road
If you’re guessing where all this is heading, you’d be correct if you surmised that the old-timers described Kevin as “difficult.” They were accustomed to a laid-back work ethic, so people complained to Alan that Kevin was “pushy.” And, because Kevin asked about the status of various projects, they also defined him as a micromanager.
Despite having 30 years in management and leadership positions with an exemplary track record, a year into the merger, Kevin was put on an Individual Improvement Plan.
Diagnosis
Some might argue that because XYZ Inc. was subsumed into Widget Services, it was Kevin’s responsibility to “fit in” with the Widget Services team. Normally, I’d say that approach should be part of an acquisition equation. However, Alan’s leadership style leads to poor communication and missed opportunities, while Kevin’s approach to management and leadership is pretty much textbook.
Widget Services Inc. might be surviving, but they are not thriving. So long as Alan continues with a lackadaisical leadership style, they are likely to remain that way.
Prognosis
It’s rather sad that Kevin is the one being criticized in this situation. Thankfully, Alan is realizing he needs to make some principled changes. As for the rest of the team? The firmly ensconced good ol’ boy mentality needs to be modified and management and leadership responsibilities need to be clearly defined and assigned.
Also, Alan must realize that people will not do what he wants – they will do what he expects. He must learn to be firmer in establishing those expectations as well as be consistent in communicating them.
To accomplish this, Alan needs to institute the necessary training and then follow up so that these things can come to be. Why is this important? If the lines of management and leadership remain fuzzy, Alan’s company may survive, but it’s highly unlikely they will thrive.
Daniel Bobinski, who has a doctorate in theology, is a best-selling author and a popular speaker at conferences and retreats. For more than 30 years he’s been working with teams and individuals (1:1 coaching) to help them achieve excellence. He was also teaching Emotional Intelligence since before it was a thing. Reach him by email at DanielBobinski@protonmail.com or 208-375-7606.
