Buddy AND Boss - Can Managers Be Both?

Despite an abundance of undergraduate and graduate programs titled "Management Science", most managerial veterans would probably agree that management is anything but! As the adage goes, it's more "art than science". There’s often no single right answer when it comes to leading others. To complicate matters, management is also ripe with paradox resulting in tensions that challenge us daily, such as the inherent conflict between being a buddy and being a boss. In my experience, it’s difficult to be both, and anyone with leadership aspirations needs to understand the implications of relating to team members as a friend, not a manager.

To be sure, there’s a difference between being friendly and being a friend. Being friendly implies acting pleasantly and building professional rapport with team members. Friendship implies much more. It connotes an emotional bond that transcends a businesslike relationship. Being friends with direct reports isn’t necessarily bad, but it can provoke weighty challenges for managers. So, managers, before becoming besties with your team members take note of a few familiar perils.

Failing to set expectations and hold others accountable

Managers set clear expectations. Friends remove them. Setting expectations and holding people accountable are fundamental behaviors for effective management; yet, many managers fail here because they want to be liked and accepted. An advantageous pursuit for friendship, but a detrimental path for leadership. 

Desired performance is necessarily dependent on specific and unambiguous communication about what is expected and holding team members accountable for doing what’s expected. When friendship interferes with accountability, teams suffer. Without accountability, employees may blame others for their actions, refuse to follow practices they find unfair, and rationalize shortcomings. Over time, these behaviors become tolerated – even accepted – undermining a manager’s influence and, ultimately, the success of the team.

Acting like a helicopter manager

Managing one’s team too closely, making decisions for them, and intervening before they make a mistake does more harm than good. Behaving like a mollycoddling caretaker sends the message that a manager lacks confidence in his team. It also increases the likelihood that attempts to delegate will fail. For more on this, read here. 

Friends watch over, intermediate and rescue before real learning can occur. Whereas managers guide team members through effective questioning and encourage them to make their own decisions. Should they fail, rather than berating them, managers recognize these experiences as teaching moments.

Prioritizing the team one leads over the team to which one belongs

Recently, I conducted a straw poll. I asked a group of HR leaders at a networking event to list the top three attributes of a strong leader. The most commonly cited attribute? Having their direct reports’ backs. In other words, protecting their team members from more senior overlords. In fact, almost all of the HR leaders had this – or a close facsimile – on their list. While I appreciate the sentiment, few things undermine the success of a leader more than prioritizing the interests of the team one leads over the management team to which they belong. Though, this behavior is firmly rooted in teams where friendship is paramount. 

Let me elaborate. A few years ago, I witnessed a disturbing conversation between a manager and her team as they were discussing the results of a recent employee survey. The manager began by making familiar excuses for the unfavorable results – “the survey launched during a difficult time”, “the results are tainted by a few unhappy people”, "some people may have felt like this, but they left" - and the like. But then something even more troubling happened. The team started grousing about the company and senior leadership team. The manager’s response? “You’re absolutely right. The company is heading in the wrong direction.” Really?

I bet it felt good in the moment. A bonding experience akin to traversing hot coals together. But, in the end, the manager diminished her credibility in the eyes of her team. If she was one of them, how possibly could she influence effectively at a more senior level? How could she ensure organization alignment when she was focused more on the concerns of her own team than the needs of the broader company?

Managers often act as buffers between more senior leaders and their teams. In some situations, insidious motives are at play, like when a manager mistrusts his team or believes he can perform better than they can. In others, managers act this way for more honorable reasons, such as to ensure their team is protected from the caprices of company executives – as friends might shield one another from the neighborhood bully. Regardless of intent, managers who behave more like a friend do a disservice to themselves and their teams by creating a culture of insouciance and dependency that neither encourages nor lends itself to high performance or innovation.

There is nothing wrong with a manager being friendly and supportive. Though, challenges can emerge when a manager's desire to be liked and accepted overshadows what’s best for the team and organization. Rather than provide emotional support and safekeeping, great managers empower those they lead by setting clear expectations, providing autonomy, and holding them accountable for achieving results. They establish appropriate boundaries with their team members and court friendships outside of the office.