Title.
Think back to the best manager you ever had. What made them good?
Also, is it a manager’s responsibility to help their direct reports grow in their position and in the company? I ran into this article:
https://hbr.org/2014/01/if-youre-not-helping-people-develop-youre-not-management-material
that says you should, otherwise you shouldn’t be a manager. Agree / disagree?
Shortly after he replaced a micro managing jerk, one of my managers told us that his job was “to make sure y’all have everything you need to do your jobs, not do your jobs for you.” The sentiment was greatly appreciated at the time.
The same manager trained everyone who was willing to learn how to do the job level directly above their current one. He was a solid guy.
Another general point would be that a manager should never ask a subordinate to do something the manager isn’t willing to do.
Agree.
A good manager takes interest in the professional development, well-being, and success of their subordinates. If they are not training you to do their job then that is because they fear being replaced and you should get out of there. A good manager praises publicly but points out diffeciencies in private.
A bad manager micromanages procedural tasks, and takes personal credit for team achievements rather than recognizing the hardworking people below them.
A good manager meets targets and is efficient and profitable with the assets given to him (employees are assets too).
A good leader takes the company in the right direction.
The distinction between a manager and leader is essential. With bad leadership you can have good managers taking the company quite efficiently in the wrong direction.
What makes a good manager good?
The fact that he’s got the big balls.
No no no…
It’s not BSB… it’s BSD
Courage is good, but it more the trait of a leader.
Business management has just taken over the military doctrine. Courage is the most important but with different repercussions in business related to leadership in war conditions. Ask the “Neutron” Jack.
It’s good if not BSM.
Read Marquis de Sade.
A good manager is good when he’s good
^ Michael Scott, is that you?
Steve Carell is one of my favorite actors. His calculated naiveté is sheer brilliance.
I don’t disagree with the article or any comments on here about what a good manager need to be, but I find there is undue pressure on managers / leaders. I am in middle management and my wife has couple reports as well and I feel like it’s a lot of work with little reward.
What if your direct report isn’t fit for the job?
What if your direct report is lazy (there are many of them out there)?
What if your direct report is entitled beyond belief?
etc etc…
A leader can’t turn someone who is lazy to be a hard worker all of a sudden. You can motivate them for a short while, but sooner or later, they will often revert to their old way. Hard to convince someone to be more appreciated of their position if an individual has determined that their six figure salary (pretty well compensated for this individual’s experience and education) isn’t enough and continually whine about being underpaid.
I find that I have been lucky with some really good staff to offset some bad ones… but to me, it’s a 50/50 crap shoot on whether someone meets even the three criteria outlined above, which makes being a manager / leader difficult as well.
+1 to SportBiker and GuyOnABuffalo.
Agree with linked article.
Micro-managing is probably the worst manager trait in my mind, next is lack of professional development.
You can’t change someone’s work ethic as a manager unless you are empowered to do so. If they report to you but you have no say over their compensation/promotion or continued employment at the firm then your toolbox for motivating them is in short supply.
You should read about the differences between a leader (they have a vision, they inspire people to follow them) and a manager (who oversees and organizes the activities of people who work for them). Being a mentor to someone, taking interest in their development, setting a positive example and being someone they wish to emulate is a far more powerful motivator than compensation or a write up from HR. These people will perform in absence of reward or punishment because they get the bigger picture. They will take ownership over their position as it relates to the team and the firm (they don’t want to let anyone down). You will make a lasting impression on them and they will pass on your lessons to those who they are in charge of.
Unfortunately, while this line of work attracts highly intelligent individuals it also disproportionately attracts self-interested D-bags who only care about the paycheck and will gladly cut corners and steam roll anyone else to secure their own position. You should avoid hiring people like this and weed them out because it is detrimental to a team. Chances are that if s/he doesn’t work hard for you its because s/he thinks you are a moron, spineless, or maybe you are setting a bad example because you yourself are lazy.
^
Thanks for proving my point exactly. All I do is agree with the post, but also provide some examples of things that may make being a manager difficult to illustrate that the onus isn’t always on the manager. The first thing someone like you does is to tell me to learn the difference between being a leader and manager and make implication that my staff view me a spineless, or lazy and etc.
Believe it or not, I already know the difference between being a manager and a leader. Also, if you read my post carefully, you will see that I have good staff that put in effort, work and time to learn and produce quality work with few bad apples. Now, does my staff performing make me a great manager and I should get credit for it since I am the great leader that motivated them? - Of course not! because they should first and foremost deserve credit for their performance, just like the poor performers need to self-reflect and take accountability.
All I am saying is, although I agree with what it means to be a good manager and leader, the staff / boss relationship isn’t all black and white - lot of grey areas and the responsibility for a cohesive relationship and work place performance goes both ways.
"I don’t disagree with the article or any comments on here about what a good manager need to be, but I find there is undue pressure on managers / leaders. I am in middle management and my wife has couple reports as well and I feel like it’s a lot of work with little reward.
What if your direct report isn’t fit for the job? Should not have hired them.
What if your direct report is lazy (there are many of them out there)? Why is it that they are lazy?(Think the movie “office space”) Motivate or fire them.
What if your direct report is entitled beyond belief? Should not have hired them. Know and recognize the difference between ambition and entitlement. Entitled employees are a cancer to the team.
etc etc…
A leader can’t turn someone who is lazy to be a hard worker all of a sudden. You can motivate them for a short while, but sooner or later, they will often revert to their old way. Hard to convince someone to be more appreciated of their position if an individual has determined that their six figure salary (pretty well compensated for this individual’s experience and education) isn’t enough and continually whine about being underpaid. (agree with you)
I find that I have been lucky with some really good staff to offset some bad ones… but to me, it’s a 50/50 crap shoot on whether someone meets even the three criteria outlined above, which makes being a manager / leader difficult as well."
-> see bold. I don’t know the specifics of your situation or the organizational structure/dynamics of your firm so I can’t speak specifically to the challenges you are dealing with. I should add that this is why it is so important to have a clearly defined and properly designed Org chart otherwise upper management is setting you up for failure as a middle manager.
kurtosis probably works at one of those giant companies where he inherited his workers and where their tenure makes it almost impossible to fire them.