realisedevelopment.net

Just another WordPress site

Understanding Your Organisation – Part 1

by

Most of the managers that I work with have an incredibly detailed knowledge of the organisations that they work in – or at least of the parts of it that they come into regular contact with. Far fewer have a good understanding of what their own organisation looks like from a more strategic or higher level perspective. This imbalance in perspective can cause too much focus on the here and now and not enough consideration of the medium and longer term. This deceptively simple, yet powerful model can help to restore a bit of balance.

It starts of with a recognition that every organisation does something (operations) for someone (customers). Whether the operation is about providing a service or a product – understanding what you provide to your customers – and their level of satisfaction is clearly important.

Customers and Operations

Just considering these two parts of the organisation can raise a host of powerful questions:

  • Who are our customers?
  • Why do they choose us?
  • What do they love about we do?
  • What do they hate?
  • What do they pay for? What else might they pay for?
  • What do they use? What else might they use?
  • How are our customers changing?
  • How efficient are our operations?
  • How effective are they?
  • Where is there most scope for improvement?
  • Who is responsible for managing operations?
  • Who is responsible for managing customers?
  • How effective is the working relationship between them?

Now let’s add a third component to the organisation that will help us to thrive into the future – a cunning plan – a strategy.

Customers, Operations and Strategy

The strategy loop invests time and money in thinking about what the organisation should be doing today if it is to continue to thrive in the future. In simple terms the operational loop is about earning today’s bottom line. The strategy loop is about ensuring tomorrow’s. In many organisations the strategy loop is almost vanishingly small. Only a few people ever think about it – and acting on it is even rarer! Sometimes ‘strategy’ is done on an annual basis usually tied up with the planning process and budgeting. Often it is done in a top down way – strategy is conceived in the board room or the chief execs office and handed down for implementation. Frequently it does not exist at all!

This strategy loop opens up some further challenging and potentially very valuable questions:

  • What is our strategy?
  • How is it developed?
  • Who is responsible for developing it?
  • How is it communicated?
  • Who is able to shape it?

This gives us a fuller picture of the organisation – but it is still not complete. A final component is required to link strategy and operations together. A component to ensure that operations inform strategy and that strategy is put into practice in operations. This component is management.

Customers, Operations, Strategy and Management

This is just about the simplest complete model of an organisation that I can imagine. A manager who is able to develop well founded knowledge of customers, operations, strategy and management is well placed to succeed.

A management team that is able to ensure balanced development of operations, management and strategy – driven by a thorough understanding of customers and their changing needs should be unstoppable.

  • Is management equally effective at developing both operations and strategy?
  • Does management make sure that what happens (operations) takes full account of strategy?
  • Who is responsible for management in your organisation?
  • How could management be improved?

This simple model of the organisation can provide a powerful catalyst for diagnosis and improvement.

The single most costly and common error a manager can make?

by

Anger - disposition or context?

The ‘fundamental attribution error’ is, in my experience, the single most common and expensive mistake a manager can make.

The fundamental attribution error is our tendency to over-emphasize ‘dispositional’, or ‘personality-based’, explanations for behaviours observed in others while, simultaneously under-emphasizing ‘situational’ explanations. In other words, we tend to assume that someones actions depend on what “kind” of person they are rather than on the contextual forces influencing the person.

So when someone loses their rag in a meeting it is because they are an angry person who can’t control their behaviour and is unprofessional.  When someone cuts us up on the motorway it is because they are a bad driver.  If someone pushes in front of us at Tesco’s it is because they are rude.

This error frequently creeps into our management.  Especially when people are not performing as we would like.  It is convenient to tell ourselves that their behaviour is because of who they are as a person – rather than because of the context in which they are behaving.  This is because we are powerless to change ‘who they are as a person’ so as a manger we need do nothing – we just accept it.  If we start to consider how the context in which they are operating drives the behaviour then we might have to take a bit more responsibility in making changes.  And quite often we find out that the behaviour that we are getting is at its very root caused by the very context that we are paid to manage!

It requires us to resist the temptation to resort to the quick label (they are just lazy/bad/angry/bossy/arrogant/unprofessional).  These labels let us off the hook but leaves the situation unchanged and the behaviour likely to recur.

Instead we should ask ourselves why a rational, sensible and good person would behave that way.  We need to learn to think ‘How Fascinating!’.  We are then forced to consider how context may have driven the behaviour, and what we might be able to do as a manager to change the context.

So for example perhaps the colleague who lost their rag in the meeting is not just Mr Angry – but is really frustrated at being talked over all the time.   In this case we might be able to facilitate the meeting a little more robustly, ensure that everyone gets their voice heard and the angry behaviour is likely to disappear.

By considering these contextual factors we do create ourselves more work (this IS the work of management and should not be shied away from) but we also give ourselves a genuine chance of making things better.  The kinds of contextual factors that cause ‘bad’ behaviours include:

  • lack of skills, judgement or experience (bad driving for example)
  • the behaviours of others (angry outbursts from someone who feels they are continually being interrupted)
  • lack of incentive/disincentive (the bad behaviour is unrecognised and therefore repeated)
  • unchallenged group norms (our meetings always start late)

So learn to recognise and challenge the fundamental attribution error at work.  I guarantee it will make you a much better manager.

PMN Partners With Doncaster CVS

by

Doncaster CVS
The Progressive Managers’ Network is partnering with Doncaster CVS to launch the network in Doncaster. PMN offers bite sized, fiercely practical, management training to help you succeed. The first training event is free of charge so that you can try it without risk.
Would you like to learn a management tool that is guaranteed to:
  • Save you time
  • Increase levels of trust in your team
  • Improve communication
  • Make you a noticeably better manager
  • Get more done – more quickly
  • Accelerate the professional development of your team, and
  • Reduce the pain of performance reviews?

Then come along to a free introductory session of the Progressive Managers’ Network at the Doncaster CVS on March 13th from 13.30 to 16.30.

At the event you will get a free gift to help improve your management worth more than £25.

Places are strictly limited so please book your place online here. Or call for more information on 0113 2167782.

If you know of a manager who might be interested please forward them a link to this page.

Future Dates for PMN in Doncaster:

April 9th – Giving and Getting Great Feedback

May 14th – Practical Coaching for Managers

June 18th – Effective Delegation

July 16th – Effective Time Management

All workshops run from 13.30 – 16.30.

Qualifications or Achievement?

by

I am often asked whether I would ever consider linking the Progressive Managers’ training to an external qualification such as a management NVQ or similar.  There are several reasons why I resist this.

I work best with managers who are interested in developing their practice – not theory.  Managers who want to make things happen and achieve outstanding results.  Not managers who want to spend time sharing their thoughts on case studies and texts or preparing evidence of what they can do for an assessor.

Most learning does not happen in the workshops that I run. It happens when people go back to the workplace and start to follow the recipes and routines that they have been taught.  I know that what I teach is useful, practical and effective.  I also know that the best results are obtained when managers take what I teach, apply it and then develop it based on their own experience, context and culture.  It is only those that apply what I teach and learn from it that should be recognised.  Not anyone who happens to show up for training.

Why pay an awarding body or an assessor to make judgements about what you know and can do?  Let your results speak for themselves.  Focus on being recognised by your peers, reports and your boss as an outstanding manager who achieves outstanding results – both in terms of performance and people development.  As long as you keep your CV up to date with clear descriptions of what you have achieved you will be as attractive to a future employer as any MBA.

I know very few people that really trust management qualifications.  Management qualifications are increasingly becoming devalued.  The qualifications are poor proxies for what someone can actually do.  Do any serious recruiters really pay much attention to whether you have an NVQ level 4 in Operational Management or not?  Certainly not the ones that I talk with!

This devaluation is partly because assessment, although expensive in time and effort, is very weak.  Having a qualification is, in my experience, no guarantee that you can achieve results as a manager.

The complexity of most management qualification structures does not help either.  Nearly all have a ‘core and options’ structure that means Sherlock Holmes might struggle to understand from a qualification what you know and can do.  Indeed in the UK if you look up management qualification there are over 400 recognised on the National Database of accredited qualifications.

Now please don’t get me wrong.  There are some great managers who have worked hard to get qualifications.  The problem is that there are also many average and poor managers who have the same qualifications.  If you want to make a positive difference and develop a successful career then focus on developing your practice – not picking up qualifications.

And if you are one of those good managers with the qualifications then don’t rely on the qualification to make you stand out from the crowd.  Emphasise the responsibilities that you have held and what you have achieved in relation to those responsibilities.  If you are a good manager then this will get you recognised by your bosses, peers and recruiters.

Committing to 121s

by

I have had a some interesting conversations in the last week or two with managers about 121s. There are a couple of issues that are probably worth a reminder.

The first is that you should be scheduling 121s well in advance with your team members and then do all in your power to keep to the slot you have booked. If you change the slot for another commitment your team member will believe that you have ‘bumped them for something more important’. If you ‘bump’ them regularly enough they will believe that most things are more important to you than their 121. Providing regularly scheduled and protected time for 121s sends out a powerful message. Once you start regularly re-scheduling then the likelihood of them being missed and the routine being lost increases significantly.

The second issue is about when to hold 121s. I personally find it best to avoid early mornings. This is when your brain is at its best for concentrating on issues that require deep thought. I try to keep these times for jobs that need concentration, analysis and focus. While 121s require active listening skills for me they fit ideally into the afternoon slots when the brain has started to slow down a little. It also means that if nay 121s in the day do HAVE to be moved then I can always bring them forward to a morning slot on the same day. Bringing 121s forward in the week rather than moving them back – or worse still postponing them sends out another powerful message.

I also try to avoid Mondays (although this is great for team meetings). This means that if we need to re-schedule I can always bring them forward to Monday. I also try to avoid Fridays so that if I have to move them back I have some slots available.

121s should as much as possible be scheduled in blocks of time – 2 or 3 in a row with perhaps 5 minutes between each. This way you may spend 10 minutes getting ready for a session of 121s and 10 minutes ‘washing up’ after the session. You will find that you need the same ‘set up’ and ‘wash up’ time for a single 121. So scheduling them in blocks of 2 saves 20 minutes; blocks of three saves 30 minutes and so on. You will also find that your 121s are generally better when done in blocks like this as you can really get into the groove’ – and stay there.

Don’t under-estimate how much this stuff matters. Your team members will make judgments about your commitments to and faith in them based on how you maintain your 121 commitments to them. It may not be very rational – but that’s humanity for you!