How to develop smart management practices

Poor management has long been identified as an economic factor undermining everything from business morale to national productivity. IIP’s last Job Exodus survey revealed that 49% of people seeking new jobs in 2018 intended to do so because of poor management. Similarly, the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) suggest that there are approximately 2.4 million ‘accidental managers’ who are over-promoted or poorly trained currently working across the UK economy.

The way that business leaders manage their people is a way of demonstrating the ethos and values that drive an organisation to the employees who work for it. There have always been several theories of leadership and people management which seek to provide a one-size-fits-all approach to managing people. Although the promise of such a solution is undoubtedly appealing, the practicality is limited because there is no silver bullet to pin down top-tier management.

Below I’ve outlined some tried and tested management practices and how they fall short of delivering transformational leadership.

Traditional management

The archetypical management style is that of top-down decision- making power. It places the employee firmly on the back foot, whilst the manager makes all key decisions with little or no collaboration with a broader team. This leads to low engagement, poor satisfaction and a general lethargy on the part of the employee.

Proactive management

This style focuses on managers who give feedback in the moment, ensuring employees know how and where to improve their performance. Not only is this a useful principle in terms of personal development for employees, it also ensures that businesses are working at their optimal level, with processes regularly reviewed and amended for best practice. However, focusing solely on proactive management can leave leaders on uncertain territory when it comes to working with employees on issues reactively i.e. when an unforeseen problem has arisen.

Reactive management

On the other end of the spectrum, reactive management is that which waits for a challenge to arise before broaching a difficulty with an employee. The holes in this style of management are far more visible as it encourages the build-up of less productive working. Rather than offering feedback in the moment and continuously improving office functions, managers wait until poor processes throw up problems and deal with them in hindsight. Not only is this strategy damaging to business productivity, it also stymies the development of people potential within the organisation.

Servant leadership

One of the latest theories in people and business management is ‘servant leadership’. Put simply, this style of leadership is open, collaborative and focusses on the development of existing staff to promote harmonious and driven teams. In theory, this idea is perfect for those organisations wanting to create a truly consultative culture, however it can be more difficult to enact in larger organisations where broad input and consensus is laborious and potentially contradictory.

Alternatives?

It has always been my belief that management style should be moulded over time, to suit the personality of the leader and the unique demands of a workplace. This is where the IIP framework can be valuable for business leaders who need less stringent guidance on how to manage their staff. Within the leadership indicator of our framework, advice is aimed at encouraging leaders to inspire, lead by example and empower their people to achieve their full potential.

In my opinion, management is a continuous development and the best leaders are able to evolve and improve alongside the business and their employees. I think that Patrick Lencioni’s ‘Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a Team’ sets out a ladder of trajectory for managers looking for a concise rule of thumb to develop a productive workforce:

1.      A culture of trust sits at the bottom of the functionality pyramid. Without trust, organisations cannot function effectively à

2.      Trust is vital if employees are to express conflicting views and to honestly debate the merits and setbacks of an idea

3.      Effective debate and discussion then allows a business to wholeheartedly commit to a decision

4.      This commitment is important in subsequently ensuring that employees are proud to be held accountable for their deliverables and to feel that their contribution to the organisation is valued

5.      Having all of the above in place establishes an inherent focus on results, encouraging organisations to consistently strive to meet their targets, knowing that they trust their team members to be honest and deliver what is being asked of them.