I’d like to hear stories about why it’s easier to get forgiveness than permission. I wonder how many people have ever found themselves in that situation and the ensuing upshot or consequences. I do find that currently, in a lot of cases, so-called managers are less likely to step outside the box and make command decisions. Is it fear of reprimand or losing their jobs, laziness or that they just don't care? Are they being trained away from thinking for themselves? Great food for thought, Bill! Happy Holidays to all!
Great managers aren’t always appreciated by upper management. I’ve seen that many times, where they’re hired away by the competition because the current management feels threatened by their vision. And yet in the end, the first management team ends up doing what they said, but years later and with greater cost.
I think that bad managers operate from a fear-based mentality. They often feel threatened by others, fear criticism, and fear failure. A defensive strategy becomes the default. This may be a result of being promoted beyond their skill and not getting sufficient support or training. Or it may just be the manager’s approach to work in the first place. Sometimes people succeed at entry or mid level positions because they think of all the things that can go wrong and get out ahead of them. A valuable employee can be a mediocre manager. I think there is also such a thing as good manager who may not be a great leader. They may not have the vision of a leader but they manage people well and can be good trainers.
Bill, I may not see exactly what you mean, but I will disagree with #7. I wholeheartedly agree with #1 through #6. To me process does count. Not having or not following process can place a lot of undo pressure and time wasting for other groups. In Operations, I can name a hundred times this has happened to our team.
I’m not sure I understand #7, because it seems to contradict a few of the earlier points. Some organizations have processes that are awful and demoralizing but still deliver satisfactory results. A great leader will care about both process and results, because a bad process is unsustainable.
I consider myself throughout my professional life as more of a leader than a manager. I could see things that needed to be done and tried to motivate my surroundings to get them done. Often very frustrating because I was often bucking traditional thought and ideas, but I always felt that I had the respect of those I worked with and for, in most cases. I was always confronted by the managers and those who thought the status quo was normal. Not always pleasant.
I agree that both process and results are important. There is a purpose to staying within the lanes. Good results will always follow good processes. A good leader will listen and ponder ideas for change.
Though I agree with the overall point of your article, many managers would take umbrage at the use of "mere" as the adjective used to describe their role. That is like referring to a woman as merely a housewife. For some or even many, the descriptor may fit; for others, it greatly undervalues their contribution. I have worked with a number of managers without whom I could not have succeeded. They allowed me the freedom to focus on larger issues, confident that the minutue was being dealt with appropriately. They were aware that a ceiling existed that they were unlikely to penetrate. They lacked the skill or some other quality needed to advance but they knew they were appreciated, recognized and rewarded for their contribution. Like a squad leader in the army, it matters little what plan may be drawn by the generals, it is the dedicated grunts in the trenches who are tasked with carrying it to fruition.
I’d like to hear stories about why it’s easier to get forgiveness than permission. I wonder how many people have ever found themselves in that situation and the ensuing upshot or consequences. I do find that currently, in a lot of cases, so-called managers are less likely to step outside the box and make command decisions. Is it fear of reprimand or losing their jobs, laziness or that they just don't care? Are they being trained away from thinking for themselves? Great food for thought, Bill! Happy Holidays to all!
My favorite manager practiced the philosophy of praise publicly, criticize privately. It was a great motivator to the entire team.
Great managers aren’t always appreciated by upper management. I’ve seen that many times, where they’re hired away by the competition because the current management feels threatened by their vision. And yet in the end, the first management team ends up doing what they said, but years later and with greater cost.
I think that bad managers operate from a fear-based mentality. They often feel threatened by others, fear criticism, and fear failure. A defensive strategy becomes the default. This may be a result of being promoted beyond their skill and not getting sufficient support or training. Or it may just be the manager’s approach to work in the first place. Sometimes people succeed at entry or mid level positions because they think of all the things that can go wrong and get out ahead of them. A valuable employee can be a mediocre manager. I think there is also such a thing as good manager who may not be a great leader. They may not have the vision of a leader but they manage people well and can be good trainers.
Bill, I may not see exactly what you mean, but I will disagree with #7. I wholeheartedly agree with #1 through #6. To me process does count. Not having or not following process can place a lot of undo pressure and time wasting for other groups. In Operations, I can name a hundred times this has happened to our team.
I’m not sure I understand #7, because it seems to contradict a few of the earlier points. Some organizations have processes that are awful and demoralizing but still deliver satisfactory results. A great leader will care about both process and results, because a bad process is unsustainable.
I consider myself throughout my professional life as more of a leader than a manager. I could see things that needed to be done and tried to motivate my surroundings to get them done. Often very frustrating because I was often bucking traditional thought and ideas, but I always felt that I had the respect of those I worked with and for, in most cases. I was always confronted by the managers and those who thought the status quo was normal. Not always pleasant.
I agree that both process and results are important. There is a purpose to staying within the lanes. Good results will always follow good processes. A good leader will listen and ponder ideas for change.
Happy Holidays everyone!!!
Though I agree with the overall point of your article, many managers would take umbrage at the use of "mere" as the adjective used to describe their role. That is like referring to a woman as merely a housewife. For some or even many, the descriptor may fit; for others, it greatly undervalues their contribution. I have worked with a number of managers without whom I could not have succeeded. They allowed me the freedom to focus on larger issues, confident that the minutue was being dealt with appropriately. They were aware that a ceiling existed that they were unlikely to penetrate. They lacked the skill or some other quality needed to advance but they knew they were appreciated, recognized and rewarded for their contribution. Like a squad leader in the army, it matters little what plan may be drawn by the generals, it is the dedicated grunts in the trenches who are tasked with carrying it to fruition.