Companies Choose Unqualified Managers 82% of the Time
Only one in ten people have the talent to manage. No wonder, according to Gallup, companies choose unqualified managers 82% of the time.
If you disagree with Gallup’s findings, establish a criteria for effective management behaviors and survey your employees, anonymously of course.
It’s the “and”:
The “and” in the following sentences makes management challenging.
- Building relationships and delivering results.
- Answering expectations from higher ups and treating people like humans rather than tools.
- Getting things done today and reminding people of the big picture.
- Giving support and challenge.
- Having tough conversations and staying optimistic.
- Innovating and establishing routines.
- Listening to input and making decisions.
- Prioritizing time and remaining flexible.
- Expecting performance and developing people.
- Providing negative feedback and affirming positive behaviors.
Managers often tell me they’re frustrated and feel unsupported.
Dealing with the “and”:
The #1 behavior of the most effective managers at Google is coaching.
Dipping your toe in the coaching stream:
- Stand beside and with people both figuratively and literally.
- Say what you see without judging it.
- I noticed your energy dip. What’s happening for you?
- That’s not working for you. What new behavior would you like to try?
- How is that getting you where you want to go? (Use this question both to affirm and confront.)
- Challenge people to give their best.
- How might you bring your best to this project?
- What behaviors align best with your highest aspirations?
- How will you know you’re succeeding?
- Silence your inner fixer for a moment or two. Provide space for individuals to solve their own problems and seize their own opportunities. (This is the coaching-manager’s greatest challenge and opportunity. If you do nothing else, do this.)
- Practice forward-facing curiosity. Briefly explore what went wrong. Quickly move to, “How might you step toward your goal?”
Which coaching questions seem most effective? Least effective?
How does the sector you work in impact the value of coaching? Manufacturing? Healthcare? Technology?
Excellent. Love the framework, and the connection to AND.
“Coaching” is such a broad concept and there are a lot of different skill sets and frameworks that get involved. Some of it seems to be mechanical, like setting up good feedback and measurement systems and some of it is the interpersonal, colleague stuff. And some is simply on the interactions and teamwork and shared ownership kinds of engagement processes, like facilitation of ideas for improvement or the sharing of best practices.
I like this framework a lot. Nicely done, Dan.
Thanks Dr. Scott. I’m glad you added some ideas to this short post. The different dimensions of coaching are important to know. One size doesn’t fit all.
One of the things I’m finding is the usefulness of listening with my heart and then telling people what I hear and feel. When a client says something that makes my energy go down I ask about it. In this sense, a coach needs to trust their intuition without getting to attached to their impressions.
In schools, the instinct is to criticize, compare, and fix. However, teaching is a complex science and teachers need that relationship-building component in order to improve. These questions allow leaders and teachers to focus on promoting instructional growth rather than making people (especially struggling teachers) feel inferior or judged. Thank you for this awesome tool!
Thanks msbartz. Making people feel inferior is a losing proposition on all fronts. Even if a person may not be competent in a given area, they can feel competent in their learning ability. Successful leaders/coaches/managers build on strengths and make people feel powerful.
Hi Dan, seems my observation that I have been sharing since 1992 is finally getting picked up.
≈ 80% of employees self-report that they are not engaged.
≈ 80% of managers are ill suited to effectively manage people.
* The two 80 percents are closely related.
Employers keep hiring the wrong people to be their managers and then they wonder why they have so few successful, engaged employees. Successful employees have all three of the following success predictors while unsuccessful employees lack one or two and usually it is Job Talent that they lack.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
Employers do a…
A. GREAT job of hiring competent employees, about 95%
B. good job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture, about 70%
C. POOR job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture and who have a talent for the job, about 20%
Identifying the talent required for each job seems to be missing from talent and management discussions. If we ignore any of the three criteria, our workforce will be less successful with higher turnover than if we do not ignore any of the three criteria.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
There are many factors to consider when hiring and managing talent but first we need to define talent unless “hiring talent” means “hiring employees.” Everyone wants to hire for and manage talent but if we can’t answer the five questions below with specificity, we can’t hire or manage talent effectively.
A. How do we define talent?
B. How do we measure talent?
C. How do we know a candidate’s talent?
D. How do we know what talent is required for each job?
E. How do we match a candidate’s talent to the talent demanded by the job?
Most managers cannot answer the five questions with specificity but the answers provide the framework for hiring successful employees and creating an engaged workforce.
Talent is not found in resumes or interviews or background checks or college transcripts.
Talent must be hired since it cannot be acquired or imparted after the hire.
And it takes 6 months or less for the new employee hire to become jaded and demotivated and unenthusiastic like the average experienced employee. That new hire shine dulls pretty quickly as they align to the norms and the culture and the actual expectations. Regression to the mean is a statistical term that addresses this.
Sad, but an organizational reality that IS correctable with good leadership.
I only disagree with the talent part — people CAN generally do a better job in so many different ways if they simply CARE and feel some ownership involvement. Yet the reality is that BOSS spelled backwards is self-explanatory when it comes to motivation.
Thanks Bob. You laid out some great stuff. Hiring – getting the right people on the bus – is essential to success. If we want to be the best, we need to hire the best.
One thing that troubled me a bit about the opening line of this post was that only one in ten people has the talent to be a manager. This statement leans toward the idea that managers are born not made. It seems obvious that both things are important. You have to be born 🙂 … you can learn.
The difference between talent and skill is worth considering.
Thank you, Dan. Being a better manager is challenging AND I am working on it. : )
AND that’s a great comment, Donna! 🙂
The most effective manager is the one who leads by example. He/she is totally focused on furthering the purpose of the organization, humble enough to learn, listen, and ask forgiveness, fixated enough on the purpose of the organization to persevere and set aside distractions. He/she wants the good of the organization, the people who work in it, and the people who are served by its goods and services. He/she cares so much about the organizational purpose that he/she is willing to step aside and allow another to lead if it makes more sense, like geese in a migrating flock, or to help a person up, like a shepherd with a hurting lamb. The steward leader behaves this way because he/she knows that leading said organization is a sacred trust. Coaching is an art that can be learned as one of the tools of leading, as it has proven to be very effective to promote personal and organizational change. The best coaches don’t just learn how to coach. They do it because it is good for the organization and the people they are called to lead.
Thanks Marc. Love your additions to the behaviors/qualities of effective managers. You reminded me of Lencioni’s latest book. He says you’re looking for three qualities Humble, Hungry, and People Smarts.
Dear Dan,
An interesting post! Good way to make the management task bit challenging is by adding ‘and’.
Coaching at the pharma industry is in the form of On-the-job Training in the field for nearly 4-6 weeks after the new batch of MSRs finish their Induction Program covering Medical and Non-Medical Aspects. Field Managers actually go along with the new joiners and demonstrate how best their daily tasks need to be performed. This also includes how best a doctor’s queries can be handled with the right good information supported by documentary evidence.
Later on, coaching also takes place in the form of role plays with the new detailing materials at cycle meets. Sharing Success Stories is one of the ways to encourage and motivate the team members.
Pharma Industry follows and makes use of this technique to prepare the high performing team of achievers while managing the field staff. The Office Staff has more of an orientation program followed by the directives coming from the relevant department heads along with HR.
Thanks Dr. Asher. Great to see you here again. I see blending between coaching, mentoring, and training in your comment. In my experience, the coaching relationship is seldom purely coaching, depending on the situation.
“If you do nothing else, do this.”
I was excited about your post until I read this. What you really said here was, “Don’t do anything except this. It’s the only thing that’s really important.”
At least, that is how our brains interpret “If you do nothing else…” “If you don’t remember anything else…” Sorry, but it’s true. And in this case, your post has been reduced to, “Keep your hands off. Let your staff solve their own problems and seize their own opportunities. This is real leadership.” Forget all the rest of what you say in this article.
Thanks Ken. Perhaps something like, “My experience indicates you’ll have to work hardest at this….”
Awesome post today…loved it all. As someone who will soon be a 1st time manager, I can already tell you that this will be something I return to on a very regular basis. I totally agree with all the “ands”.
Thanks Rian. Congratulations on earning a role as manager. I think your humble and passionate attitude will take you far. Cheers
After working in management for the past three years (and a previous 17 “in the field”), I am totally convinced that the information you provided is accurate. My organization offers coaching classes that are taught by a couple of very talented individuals from EMA. I had the opportunity to attend one of the classes earlier this year. I quickly discovered that I had the tendency to try to “fix” everyone’s issues whenever questions arose that I could weigh in on. Coaching taught me a whole new angle on leadership…one that wasn’t covered when studying leadership for my Master’s degree. I remember one of the initial complaints that got back to me after my promotion; it was along the lines of ‘technical people don’t always make the best managers’. It has taken time and lots of studying to learn the necessary skills to be an effective member of management (and I have much more to learn!). Thanks for the useful information!
Good stuff, Ryan. Continuous Continuous Improvement combined with some good perspective. We can all benefit with that kind of thinking — I am actually thinking along those lines right now…
Thanks. I am one of those people who started my BS and MS a bit later than some. In the end, I was thankful for waiting because my experience ended up being the primary source of my research papers. I can’t imagine the increased level of difficulty that I would have experienced had I pursued my Master’s in my 20s. It was nice to be able to write about real world experiences. Learning never ceases…
Yo, Dan.. been nearly 100 years since I’ve commented in here but your post here inspired.
Ok.. I’m thinking Peter Principle here, Dan. There are so many work environments where people are somehow promoted from the lower ranks because they’ve done so well in those lower ranks and someone feels they will do well in supervision or management… without bothering to check if that person has the skills necessary for management. That run-on sentence explains why most of management incompetence abounds in organizations. I think a good example of this are the trades. A plumber might do a superb job in his job but that in no way means he can strike out on his own and expect to get others to perform in his way, nor does it guarantee he can deliver great customer service, or operate the business end of the business.
This begets my own concept that management itself should be a profession… rather than a position. In fact, I posted on this myself in my blog in 2012… here…
https://dougsboomerrants.wordpress.com/2012/01/31/management-position-or-profession/
The concept doesn’t fit 100% for every industry but most would benefit.
I read your stuff all the time, Dan. Keep it up. 🙂
Great tips on the questions to ask, Dan. A crucial first step is for the manager and the employee to get on the same side of the issue and look for a common solution.
I wonder about the 82%, It seems logical, because people are promoted on their potential. I have never served in a job where I already knew exactly how to do it. I had to learn along the way, and I hope it can be said that I got smarter and better every day. About the time people have it “figured out” they are being considered for another position.
Jon