Brian de Haaff的动态

When I was a "big" manager, I used to ask folks to tell me the following (this was my 4 point rule, didn't read any book on this stuff): 1. clearly define the problem 2. tell me what would you do to fix it 3. tell me what you need from me to fix it 4. tell me what would happen if nothing happens Only after that is clear, I would take my time and energy to try to solve the issue *together*.

As a PM, I have learned to always have an ask. If I have a problem on a project (they are called issues), I first bring it to my team for discussion, which usually yields some options that I can then present to management. I shoot for three options. When I was young PM, I went to to see a speaker who had been part of the press dept for one of the White Houses. This was in the 90s. The thing that I clearly remember was his guidance to always have three options: 1 was to do nothing, 2 was a reasonable solution, 3 usually involved nuclear weapons. That really stuck with me and I have used it time and time again. So, I completely understand the manager's request for solutions to go with problems. Now there should always be room for someone to walk into their managers office and talk through a problem. I do like to bounce ideas off of others because talking it through helps me to pull my thoughts together because I am not a linear thinker. This all assumes a level of egalitarianism in the boss - worker relationship. None of this will work with an autocratic leader.

I really appreciate an employee that brings a few potential solutions with every problem so I know they are thinking and not deferring the workload into me. Eventually that person will have my position, and at that point they have earned it.

This was the strategy used by US President Reagen. It wasn't that he didn't want to hear about the problems- but he had a lot more on his plate than just that ONE problem. His quotation "Don't bring me problems, bring me solutions" meant that whoever's department was best equiped for that situation could come up with the viable options. "Mr President, which solution should we proceed with?"

I have found it successful in these situations to present an idea to first gauge reaction. If there is a slight interest, I then offer details on the benefits of the idea to gain buy-in. Then the "boss" will likely offer input without realizing there is a "problem".

One of the reasons that "Boss" exists is to help & enable his team. Firstly, if his direct reports are going to do everything for him aka "solve all the problems", why is a boss needed ? Does he have a right to exist? Secondly, if he cannot handle hearing negative comments, then it is a proof that he is a "weak" manager and definitely not a "leader". Thirdly, if a boss does not have the attitude of "making his hands dirty" and "being bold to face the difficulties", who will respect him?

Approaching a boss always with problems is a turn off... That is not to say that problems should not be brought up. But approaching the boss with a problem and a thought out possible solution and willingness to hear things out is always welcoming.

Excellent question. The only logical answer (s) I could say, is that we work as a team and coming up with ideas (silly to some, sensible towards others) in the hope of benefitting everyone as a whole. And the response "bring me solutions", couldn't be more apt, because the department manager isn't able to "hold the hand" of colleagues all the time, they have their own pressures/deadlines to take care of, if anything - strange as it appears - the boss is looking to you for guidance!.

Perhaps if problems were reframed as possible opportunities that require a well thought out plan to ensure positive results...things might be more positive for this boss? I think you're setting this boss up to overact if you mention the word "problem". You could be priming him to be negative.

If the boss only wants to hear about solutions, and not about problems, then the boss is not a leader, he or she is a follower. This is the absence, not the presence of mentorship. Ultimately we all encounter problems. They make us look bad when we are not aware of, nor looking to solve them. Firstly, if propagated down throughout the chain of command, ignoring problems until a problem is found is unsustainable, and results in no problems being solved – because you can’t solve a problem by ignoring it. So this is not a “skill” for getting results; quite the opposite in fact – it is the lack of skill, and the disregard of results. It is not the way managers get things done, and should not be perceived as such by subordinates – for if it is, and your subordinates are looking to improve themselves, then they will likely try to apply it in their own careers; further propagating the problem. If a boss doesn’t want to hear about problems, then they should be placed in a role more suitable for a follower. If you’re in this situation, either find a new boss, learn to deal with it, or mentor your own boss (for the bold among us). Secondly failing late like this you’ll be left with a bigger issue than you would, had you applied yourself to begin with. Overcoming problems is the way people advance in organizations, not by hiding from them. These are the steps to overcoming obstacles in the work place: 1. Discovery: The stroke of insight that allows someone to reasonably predict a better outcome (hard) 2. Problem: The part where you have to convince everyone that something is a “problem” and not just the way it is (often harder) 3. Apply the solution (often the easiest part)