Five Bad Habits of Managers

© 2004, Coert Visser

It is widely known that the human factor is of crucial importance to organizational success. But this does not make clear just how managers can effectively deal with people issues. Despite all good intentions and efforts many managers often do not succeed in bringing out the best in people. Research by David Maister (2001) shows that many employees think that managers consider money and customers more important than employees.

Five bad management habits

Below I describe five had habits of managers that stand in the way of success:

1. Imitation neurosis

Many managers are inclined to follow management trends. New management concepts, often called ‘hypes’ seem to spread like contagious viruses. Recently I listed some hypes: empowerment, core competencies, the learning organization, self managing teams, business process reengineering, total quality management, competency management, enterprise resource planning, investors in people, coaching. One of the HR-manager in the audience said, smiling: “Bingo, we’ve got them all!” Dutch professor of change management Willem Mastenbroek (1997) put it like this: “approximately 75% of the initiatives turns out to be a fiasco. But never mind, the next paradigm jump is already presenting itself.” In short: waste of energy, confusion and cynicism.

2. Defect fixation

When confronted with problems many managers have a strong tendency to look for mistakes, deficiencies, and guilty people. Research of Gallup (Buckingham. &. Clifton, 2001). has illustrated how negatively focused most managers are. Some examples: personnel selection is being executed as a process of risk detection (what risk to we take if we hire this applicant?), in appraisal conversations managers focus mainly on what’s wrong with the person and the performance, and in change management negative goals are formulated (how can we lose this problem?) and a defect based approach is followed (how can we eliminate problem causes?). Fixation on defects often has the following disadvantages: 1) while searching for problem causes it seems more and more causes are found, 2) resistance increases, and 3) problems grow in an unsuspected manner.

3. Supervision addiction

Many managers tend to supervise and check employees too much. Many employees have been told that they are getting more autonomy and decision freedom but feel disappointed when their manager in fact keeps on controlling and overruling them. That managers have a hard time letting go is demonstrated in research by Cialdini et al (1997). They explain this with the so-called faith in supervision effect. In short, this means that both managers and employees have an unjustified strong faith in the value of supervision. This tendency of managers to not let go usually leads to cynicism about the beautiful rhetoric of empowerment and delegation. A separate issue is that the quality of the work and the commitment to work and organization are negatively affected by the experienced lack of autonomy.

4. Individual obsession

Many managers see the organization more or less as a collection of individuals instead of as a complex system. This tendency to overestimate the importance of personal attributes and to underestimate situational factors is so famous among social scientist that they have named it the fundamental attribution error. This habit works through in things like a strictly individual-focused selection process, individual target setting, individual performance appraisal and rewards, personal development programs, and a headcount approach to personnel. This individual obsession leads to unproductive competition between colleagues and to a too small investment in cooperative relationships and in the work system.

5. Elite glorification

Many managers invest one-sidedly and excessively in ‘top potentials’. Elite glorification is associated with the above mentioned fundamental attribution error. Examples of what this can lead to: excessive pay for top managers, unbalanced high-potential policies (indulging them and promoting them too fast). The excessive attention to the superstars of the organization in fact degrades the majority of the employees and allows for grabbling and self-promoting CEO’s). It is ironic that research shows that the best top managers really are tenacious, modest and relatively unknown (Collins, 2001).

What is good about the five habits?

Would it be better if managers would eliminate these habits altogether? But what would they have to do instead then? There would be the danger of throwing away too much. Because al these habits have their good sides too. The good thing about the imitation neurosis is that managers are open for external knowledge and innovation. It implies a willingness to learn form the outside world. Without this organizations would become too rigid and self-satisfied. The good thing about defect fixation is that the manager acknowledges what is not right. The manager is aware of risks and threats. Without this the organization would slip into a state of unfounded positivism. The good side of supervision addiction is that it implies a willingness to lead and take responsibility, which provides clarity and direction. Without direction, correction, and restrictions and organization could develop into anarchy or even disintegrate. The good thing about individual obsession is that the importance of the human factor is recognized and that individual needs and contributions are valued. Without this there would be a dictatorship of the collective. The good thing about elite glorification is that differences in individual performance and talents are acknowledged. Without this a dictatorship of mediocrity could reign.

Which complementary habits are required?

The five bad habits are not only bad but they have their good sides too. Thus they don’t have to be abolished completely. However, they are being handled to one-sidedly and have to be supplemented by other habits.

1. Imitation neurosis: attention to external and internal knowledge. Put the first priorities with learning from own experiences (solutions that have already proven their value in the relevant context). Also, be open for external solutions but evaluate systematically how they are useful or can be made useful in your context.
2. Defect fixation: attention to problems and successes. 1) use problem acknowledgement to gain energy for change, 2) then proceed success-focused by a) describing what success would look like to you, b) analyzing how you have in the past been able to create this kind of success, and, c) extending and recreating this success.
3. Supervision addiction: attention to directing and to providing autonomy. Keep on leading, directing, supervising, checking, and correcting but only on a small set of essential issues. Beware that you don’t fall back into a too controlling mode in difficult situations (count to ten…)
4. Individual obsession: attention to individuals and the organizational system. 1) Keep on acknowledging individual achievements and needs but don’t overdo it, 2) recognize the considerable importance of interaction and cooperation between people (have a network view of the organization) 3) recognize the great importance of the operating system (like organizational structures, planning systems, computer systems, procedures, etc.).
5. Elite glorification: attention to ‘top people’ and to all others. 1) Recognize and utilize differences in talents, 2) develop the talents of all employees, 3) create symbolic egalitarism. Research shows that accentuating differences in status (very prestigious rooms and cars, flying first class, very large pay differences, etc.) can hinder organizational success (Pfeffer, 1996).

A small change will do

The five habits block success but appear to have their good sides too. Managers who have these bad habits don’t have to change radically. They can instead hold on to the good sides of the five habits and supplement these with some complementary habits. A drastic change is not necessary.

References

1. Buckingham, M. & D.O. Clifton (2001). Now, discover your strengths. Free Press
2. Cialdini, Pfeffer, Hanna &Knopoff (1997). Faith in Supervision and the Self-enhancement Bias: Two Psychological Reason Why Managers Don't Empower Workers. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, v. 20(4), pp. 313-321
3. Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't. HarperCollins
4. Maister, D. (2001). Practice What You Preach : What Managers Must Do to Create a High Achievement Culture. Free Press.
   Mastenbroek, W. (1997). Organisatierot, www.managementsite.net
5. Pfeffer, J. (1996). Competitive Advantage Through People: Unleashing the Power of the Work Force. Harvard Business School Press