An issue that has always troubled me is whether
management is a form of manipulation. I would
really like to believe that you can be a manager
without being manipulative, but it is my opinion
that managers have no other option at times.
The uncomfortable truth is that when resolving
all the different pressures from existing customers,
your own organization, bids for new business,
and the like, you are inevitably going to have
to persuade people to do things that are not
entirely in their own interests. It is also
an uncomfortable truth that you are not always
going to be in a position where you can explain
the bigger picture to your staff. All that you
can hope to achieve is a level of moral manipulation—that
is, to find a situation such as the following:
If your team knew the whole
picture, the majority of members would support
your actions.
One of the reasons that staff members may not
trust a manager is that they know that managers
sometimes must have divided loyalties. Managers
of teams are truly caught between a rock and
a hard place. On the one hand, you as manager
will probably be loyal to the team; indeed,
you probably like to think you are part of the
team. On the other hand, you are a representative
of management, albeit possibly the most junior,
and so the team will correctly suspect that
you are one of "them," and not really
one of "us."
Balancing what is best for the organization
against the best interests of my team's members
is an aspect of management that gives me many
sleepless nights. As manager, you must decide
in each case where to draw the line. This is
an unquestionably difficult task, but I do have
a piece of advice:
Members of your team should
know exactly where you and they stand.
In other words, a decision that clearly favors
either management's or the team's best interest—but
not both—is not an issue to fudge. When
you have listened and discussed the issue with
each person concerned, then you need to tell
the whole team what your decision is, and why
you have made it. You have to make it clear
that your decision is final and that people
have to accept it. Too often, I see managers
fudging the unpopular decisions, or blaming
senior management.
A corollary of this wisdom is
As manager, you cannot be
an ordinary member of the team.
Just because you will have to make hard, unpopular
decisions does not mean that you are an uncaring
person. Going back to the analogy between management
and parenting, good parents can say no to their
children frequently, while maintaining a loving,
caring relationship with them.
One of the reasons for mentioning the issues
of manipulation and divided loyalties is that
many managers complain that their staff members
are suspicious of their motives. It basically
comes down to whether your staff respects and
trusts you. Staff suspicion is quite natural
and you can only create the necessary levels
of trust and respect by your openness, honesty,
and integrity.
How open should you be?
A good starting point is to be as open and
honest as possible. What the clause "as
possible" means in practice, however, is
difficult to define. I tackle this issue by
listing the circumstances in which I believe
less-than-total openness can be justified:
The effort of communication
is not worthwhile. You will never have
as much time as you would like to have to
communicate with your team. The sad truth
is that even if you spent every minute of
every day communicating, that would not be
enough for some people. You have to view communication
as an investment in a healthy team, and decide
what level of investment you think you can
afford. This means you have to prioritize
your communication, and consequently, some
issues will drop off the bottom of the list.
You need to respect confidentiality.
You may be instructed by your organization
to keep certain information confidential,
or you may not be able to release information
that was told to you by someone in confidence.
Full disclosure will unnecessarily
disrupt or distract your team. A good
example of information sometimes better withheld
might be the latest initiatives from headquarters.
Many of these never actually get implemented
in a way that is as threatening as they first
appear. My approach to such issues is to openly
answer any questions about them. I try to
go occasionally to group gatherings, at coffee
break for example, so that people can quiz
me. In this way, I make it clear that there
is no secret about what is going on, but I
also demonstrate that I am relaxed about such
things and imply that if and when they impinge
on the team, I will immediately brief everyone.
Full openness would cause
unnecessary pain. On occasion, you may
need to discuss how a member of your team
can improve his or her performance. You may
decide to be selective in describing specific
failings in order to help the individual handle
and respond positively to your criticism.
Whether you are addressing individual team
members or entire teams, openness is the underpinning
property of all communication.
