The Pros And Cons Of "Stay In Your Lane" Management Approaches

For part of 2023, I worked at this place called “Culture Partners,” which I think is also sometimes called “Partners in Leadership” in the market. Basically it’s “culture consulting,” so they go in and try to help a company deal with cultural elements and hopefully those changes are tied to revenue. This company does some good work, but in reality most “culture consulting” is really just a front for executives wanting to seem like they care about something they don’t, a cheaper way to pay for training, or a smokescreen for future layoffs. Internally, this company is mostly reformed PA-based and UT-based sales guys who do OK on closing deals, but once the deal is closed, the actual “culture shift” you get is … well, hard to measure.

I worked at this place eight months or so. I liked it for 5.5 and then I got a new manager. This guy was a classic middle Manager who thinks he’s an executive, to a tee. He’d call all sorts of pointless, useless meetings and tell stories about how he hosted a BBQ for 30 that weekend and his son was the lead in a play and also starred in a soccer game, and he’d constantly talk about being “data-driven” even though every single decision we made was based on his gut. He got rid of me in about 2-3 months. It was hard for a while, and I started bartending actually, but ultimately it was for the best. We were never going to get along. I hate performative management cloaked in how busy and relevant you are.

Well, when my relationship with my manager was declining, there was this other lady' who worked there — an “influencer,” which means she was an attractive blond woman who posted short videos on LinkedIn that middle-aged men gawked at — who told me often that I needed to “stay in my lane.” She said “stay in your lane” enough that it was almost a macros when we texted or emailed.

Because I can be awkward and do have my own opinions, it wasn’t the first time I had heard that at a job, no. But this time, I started thinking about it more, because I heard it 4x/day until I was let go.

The Pros Of “Staying In Your Lane”

It’s largely true that most middle managers are middle-aged men, and many of them have the conversational and emotional aptitude of a duck with epilepsy. They also usually have 2–3 kids back at home, a wife with certain demands, and an inflationary (and probably recessionary) environment. So, they juggle a lot and most of their week is just meetings and calls. They don’t really do any work, or if they do, it’s at 10pm. I get it. So it’s a prized possession for a middle Manager when you get a target-hitting drone employee. This person stays in their lane, does what they are asked, and when you say jump, they will say “How high and off which bridge, sir?” Managers love that. That’s a strong case for “stay in your lane” as a manager. You want that type of employee.

As an employee, the case is that when you’re perceived as not staying in your lane, you lose your job — either you get forced out, you get “quiet fired,” or the next time there are layoffs, your name is at the top of the list. If you want to keep a source of income, staying in your lane is paramount.

The Cons Of “Stay In Your Lane”

• It discourages learning about other parts of the business.
• It penalizes initiative among people, which we claim to value.
• It furthers silo-based thinking and action.
• It is not “innovative” or “transformative” or anything else.

How do these two concepts weigh out against each other?

Usually, “stay in your lane” wins — because at a time when $300,000 is the new $100,000, most people want to keep an income source, so they just do what the boss says and what they think the boss wants. This can still be a perilous position, as many bosses have no idea what they want and it (what they want) changes by the 10-minute interval, but it’s better than challenging or threatening or asking for new work, because bosses tend to really not understand those things. If you want to keep a gig, usually you just get in your swim lane and stay there.

Obviously, this makes the core focus of hiring absolutely comical, because every job description talks about initiative and go-getters and forward-thinking and progressive (not political, mind you!) and innovative and all that shit, and in reality, that stuff terrifies most managers. They want good little soldiers who make them feel like they’re deified, respected, and served.

Not “breaking news” per SE, but the semantics of “how we discuss work” vs. “what work really is” are often very far apart.

Your take?