Why Middle Managers are Failing Their Organizations

Middle Managers Are Unprepared to Lead

There is a growing body of evidence indicating that organizations are in the midst of a middle-management crisis. As middle managers are facing increasing responsibilities, pressure is mounting as organizations run lean and fewer resources are available. To make matters worse, middle managers are not receiving the leadership development training they need to be successful. Fast Company calls these combined factors “a recipe for disaster,” citing turnover and burnout as major repercussions.

In a paper titled ‘Danger in the Middle: Why Midlevel Managers Aren’t Ready to Lead,’ Harvard Business School suggests we are suffering from an epidemic of “underperforming and demoralized middle managers who lack the networking, planning, and team-building skills necessary to excel in the flat organizational structures that are so prevalent today.” The paper goes on to underline the danger stemming from the fact that “Executives depend on middle managers to execute their company’s vision and strategy, yet companies are not giving middle managers the development they need to succeed in their roles.”

In addition to a lack of opportunities for middle managers to develop management skills, organizations have systematically ignored new managers’ needs. Management guru Ken Blanchard states that 47% of new team leaders receive no training at all for their role, which could very well be part of the reason that 60% of new managers underperform during their first two years. This experience negatively influences their management performance for the rest of their careers. A Financial Times article suggests that the problem arises when “managers who are identified and promoted for doing a great job are then expected to delegate to other people” because even high performing individuals “rarely possess the skills and expertise to run a team. They fear letting their bosses know that they’re in over their heads,” which perpetuates the problem.

The Impact on Engagement and Retention

The impact of this middle management crisis on organizations is wide reaching. Middle managers play the key role of translating executive strategy into tactical reality and enabling their teams to be effective, but as Forbes points out in the ‘Survival Guide for Middle Managers,’ “many managers are never given the tools or training to manage. They typically rise through the ranks of a technical track and then—all of a sudden—are given a team to manage and are expected to do so effectively.” Forbes suggests that, above all, these new managers “struggle with the soft skills: giving feedback, setting expectation, developing their team, and managing conflict.” The subsequent impact on the teams they lead and corporate performance overall is significant and troubling.

While this problem has numerous symptoms, perhaps the two most visible and problematic are low employee engagement and low employee retention. Gallup’s study of almost 200,000 U.S. employees indicates that a mere 32% are “involved in, enthusiastic about, and committed to their work and workplace.” The obvious consequence is that an astonishing 68% of your employees are presumably performing their duties with little effort or care.

For many employees, their team and manager heavily shape their experience in a company. It’s often said that people leave managers, not companies. Gallup now estimates that 51% of employees are actively looking for a new job. Given that the cost of replacing an employee is somewhere between 2 and 6 times their annual salary (and considering that the cost of appropriately replacing a top performer is likely much higher), this presents a significant problem.

One additional note on the issue of engagement and retention relates to middle managers themselves. A McKinsey study recently found that middle managers “are less committed to staying with their companies, less enthusiastic about their work, less satisfied with their own performance, and far less satisfied than more senior executives with how their bosses are doing.”  Indeed, Gallup’s research does not indicate any significant deviation from the average for middle management engagement. In fact, the lack of engagement among middle and front-line management is likely to be a cause of lack of engagement in their subordinates.

Leadership Development as a Solution

In the aforementioned paper, HBR suggests a solution: “To evolve as leaders, managers have to internalize the idea that leadership is fundamentally different from managing tasks. Managers must give up outmoded roles and self-perceptions, adopting new ways of acting, thinking, and feeling.” This approach suggests the need for a specific and deliberate learning strategy to enable middle managers to fill the gaps in their management and leadership toolkit.

While some managers will seek out these opportunities for themselves, many are simply too busy to do so, and it then falls upon the organization to provide a structured leadership development program. As HBR so eloquently summarizes, “The time is ripe for companies to deepen their commitment to midlevel managers with multifaceted development programs that enable participants to learn new concepts and mind-sets and then put them to work in a real-world practical setting.” The article concludes that implementing these structured leadership programs will “improve morale in the managerial ranks, thereby increasing retention of top talent and enriching their leadership pipeline.” The overall impact of effective leadership development for middle managers is clear: “With proper leadership development and support, companies can unleash the potential of their midlevel managers to improve morale, foster collaboration, and help the organization more quickly and efficiently respond to changing market conditions and seize strategic opportunities.”

(This article was originally posted on the Brilliant Training blog.)