Archive for the ‘mismanagement’ Category
A cliche-ridden corporate crisis in five limericks
In times of crisis, some managers tend to lapse into cliche-speak. So it’s no surprise that things go from bad to verse…
Market churn has set us adrift.
What we need is a paradigm shift.
Get our ducks in a row,
push the envelope,
to keep us from going o’er the cliff.
The boss says, “Let’s touch base.
Make game-plans for the next phase.
We’ll have meetings and talks.
Think outside the box,
to ensure we’re still in the race.”
But the elephant in the room
refuses to sing to our tune,
or dance to our beat,
sing from the same sheet
– even once in a blue moon.
Chin up! We’re still in the ring.
The fat lady hasn’t started to sing.
It ain’t over, they say,
’til it’s over, so hey,
let’s see what the new day will bring.
In the end, we stake our claim
to fifteen seconds of fame.
All said and done,
we’ve hit a home run
in the dying minutes of the game.
Incidentally, portions of this piece have been reproduced as an epigram in Chapter 1 of my book, The Heretic’s Guide to Best Practices. Quite appropriately, that chapter is entitled, Platitudes: empty words that make a lot of noise…
The Jekyll and Hyde manager
Marty was in the server room, working with the consultant from Guaranteed Uptime, when Rob burst in. “Marty, I want you to go over to Jan’s desk right away,” he said. “She’s having trouble with the CMS again.”
“OK Rob, just as soon as I finish here.”
“No! You’ll need to go right away. If she doesn’t get looked after she’ll complain direct to Max. Then he’ll raise a stink about how inefficient IT is.” Rob’s tone was such that even the consultant looked up in askance.
Marty had been through this before. “Yeah Rob, give me five minutes. We’re almost done here.”
“You’d better get down there soon,” he said. Then , turning abruptly, he stomped off slamming the door on his way out.
The consultant looked at Marty, eyebrows raised.
“Don’t ask”, said Marty, and continued with his work.
Less than five minutes later…
“Uh oh,” said Marty sotto voce, as he heard Rob crash in again.
“I thought I told you to go over to Jan. Drop what you’re doing and go…NOW!”
Marty shook his head, and turning to the consultant he said, “I’ll be back in five.” He brushed past Rob and walked out.
—
The next day, word of Rob’s tantrum got around within the team. Regardless of the urgency of Jan’s problem, the consensus was that Rob’s behaviour was not acceptable. Yet, everyone knew that nothing would change. Rob had joined the company just under a year ago, and had been anxious to make a mark from day one. Obviously he’d succeeded, because although his team didn’t think much of him, senior management seemed to have a different view…
—
“Hi Max. Everything OK? Anything we can do for you?” asked Rob in a tone of faux sincerity. He’d spied Max entering the IT area and had rushed out to greet him.
“No. It’s all good. You’ve been looking after us very well. Jan mentioned that you sorted out some problems for her double quick yesterday.” He took Rob aside. “Look,” he said, “you’ve been doing a fine job since you took over. It’s been noticed, and even talked about at the recent board meeting. Well done, and keep it going.”
Max’s words sounded like an endorsement to Rob. “After all,” he thought, “if management likes what I’m doing, I must be doing a good job.”
—
Jekyll and Hyde and managers such as Rob are a fact of corporate life. They are easily recognised by the two faces they present at work – Jekyll to those who they report to and Hyde to those who report to them. Such behaviour enables them to get ahead in the short run but, because they ruin their work relationships in the process, they often lose out in the longer term.
There is another way, of course. That is to get ahead by doing things right. The two are not mutually exclusive, regardless of what Jekyll and Hyde managers may think. It is possible to advance and treat everyone, regardless of their position, with respect and consideration. If done this way, one will advance and also retain the loyalty of those who one may depend on in the future.
A tale of two perceptions
Stan was the go-to guy in the IT department. He had a deep knowledge of many technical areas, and had the ability to come up with creative solutions to just about any technology-related problem. Further, unlike your stereotypical IT employee, Stan understood the business (he had worked at this company for several years) and was very articulate. All in all, the perfect IT guy…or so it seemed, until the day Stan was sacked.
His colleagues were shocked, stunned, and many other emotions of a similar shade. They asked the simple question, “Why?”, but got no satisfactory answer from anyone. Management wouldn’t say anything except the official line which was, “Consistently unacceptable performance” – a line his colleagues simply didn’t believe. Getting no believable answers, they indulged in wild hypothesising, which included a conspiracy theory or two. Stan himself wouldn’t say, which only added spice to the speculations.
It turns out the truth behind Stan’s dismissal was really quite simple. Stan was a victim of perceptions – or two perceptions to be precise. Let me explain…
Within the IT team, Stan was indeed the go-to guy. He wouldn’t hesitate to drop what he was doing to help a colleague resolve a technical issue. He’d spend hours reading up on and exploring technologies, writing nifty utilities and even contributing to the odd open source project. All this made him ever more valuable as technical employee. He was perceived by his IT colleagues as brilliant, approachable and always helpful.
Trouble is, folks on the business side didn’t share this perception. They perceived him as being arrogant and unhelpful. A typical complaint from an end-user would go something like, “I told him over two months ago that this report isn’t working, and he still hasn’t fixed it. I asked about it yesterday and he tells me he’s still working on it.”
On digging deeper it turned out that Stan was a serial postponer. He’d continually put off doing work that he found uninteresting. This included any business-related issues, application fixes, new reports or whatever. Stan claimed that his technical workload left him little time to do anything else. So, as the pile of unattended issues on his desk grew ever higher, the business-wide perception of Stan sank lower and lower. He got a couple of warnings which he ignored. Eventually, his manager gave up and put him on a performance management program. Stan dealt with this in the worst possible way. He immersed himself deeper into technical matters, to the further detriment of his business responsibilities. Paradoxically, he continued to grow in his IT colleagues’ estimation whilst incurring the increasing ire of the business. Then one fine day things came to a head and the rest, as they say, is history (as is poor Stan) .
Perceptions matter. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. This is particularly important to those who have to maintain a variety of professional relationships in the workplace. Corporate IT is a case in point: folks who work in IT must be able to deal with technical and business people. As illustrated by the Stan’s story, perceptions should be managed on both fronts. Mis-management of perceptions is what leads to the stereotype of the inarticulate, unhelpful, technology obsessed IT employee. Many corporate IT departments have a Stan or two (or more!) lurking within. Such folks would do well to heed this tale.
Eight to Late 