|
Ultimate Mango posted:This is a good thread and has some really good advice so far. Dik Hz posted:This reminds me of something I learned. As manager, always voice your opinion last. Many people feel uncomfortable sharing their opinions or ideas after the manager has already weighed in. And there's another group that will act as yesmen/women. If you get everyone's input first, you get more ideas on the table and that's always a good thing. Vulture Culture fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Aug 10, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:59 |
|
|
Being a good manager is about servanthood. You are there to serve your employees, not to make them follow your orders or do your bidding. Serving includes removing obstacles and getting the gently caress out of the way so they can actually do their jobs well. It also includes fiercely defending them from upper management interference and unfair treatment, like a den mother protects her cubs. Be on their side at all costs and do your best to improve their lives. The rest is just details.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
I guess this might be the best place to ask. Managers, how do I sell myself as a good retail manager? Thanks to cronyism, I'm training people from outside the company into positions higher than my own. I'm 0 for 3 in manager and assistant manager interviews now, which I'd probably chalk up to a lack of experience (just shy of 2 years). But I'm also drat good at what I do and have a resume replete with reasons why. What super important managerial qualities should I be pitching in person?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Rogue Lemon posted:What super important managerial qualities should I be pitching in person? If you are interviewing with someone you will be reporting to if hired, then pitch your ability to make your superiors look good. If you are interviewing with someone you will be managing (happens sometimes), then pitch your ability to shield your underlings from political bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
A lot of people have already provided some great advice, but to add my own: When you're setting clear expectations for them, emphasize that you don't want to hear "complaints". Rather, you want to hear solutions. As a Manager, you'll get people complaining about their co-workers (the frequency at which this happens depends on the people you manage). A lot. This gets annoying, and it's a huge time-waster. So if your employees are constantly nagging about this thing their co-worker did or didn't do, tell them- "I don't want complaints- I want solutions. What can we do to make sure that this doesn't happen again? Because if the employee is complaining for the sake of complaining, they won't have anything to say. But if they have something constructive to suggest, you're giving them a chance to suggest it. It'd a great way to communicate that you're open to suggestions, but at the same time it tells them that petty complaints won't be given any attention (and they shouldn't). melon cat fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Aug 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
melon cat posted:A lot of people have already provided some great advice, but to add my own: When you're setting clear expectations for them, emphasize that you don't want to hear "complaints". Rather, you want to hear solutions. "I don't want complaints, I want solutions" is something a cartoon CEO would say. If you're aspiring to be the next Jack Donaghy or a pointy-haired boss, that's great. But most effective managers don't get by on being deliberately combative; they get by on knowing what's going on with their staff. You don't want to be their friend, but you have to be attentive to the problems that people face on the job (read: at least listen to rants) or there is absolutely no way you can maintain any kind of motivated workforce. And in some cases, like continuous harassment, the beleaguered and intentional ignorance of small behaviors, placing the onus of resolution on the person reporting them, might be a huge HR liability in instances like hostile work environments or sexual harassment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Misogynist posted:It's possible you've mis-phrased something, but going off of what was actually written here, this is really bad advice. I've had a lot of situations where an employee asks to meet with me to complain about something Coworker A did. We'll talk for several minutes, and when ask them at the end, "What can we do to fix this problem?" they usually stare at me, then continue ranting and ignore the question. Nine times out of ten, they just want to continue feuding with whichever coworker they decided that they don't like very much. They just wanted to complain and drag their Coworker's name through the mud. 30 minutes wasted. If you're a Manager and there's work to do, there has to be something useful to come out of these types of conversations. Otherwise, the employee is just complaining for the sake of complaining. As a Manager, you can't allow yourself to get tangled up in such conversations or else you'll find yourself wasting a ton of time. quote:(read: at least listen to rants) quote:And in some cases, like continuous harassment, the beleaguered and intentional ignorance of small behaviors, placing the onus of resolution on the person reporting them, might be a huge HR liability in instances like hostile work environments or sexual harassment melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
"Don't bring me complaints, bring me solutions" is the biggest crock of poo poo advice that gets circulated in the corporate world. The employee's job is to communicate problems to the manager. It's the manager's loving job to fix those problems. That's why managers get paid more than regular employees: they have the experience and education to not just notice problems but also come up with solutions that make sense. Furthermore, expecting solutions from employees shows a stunning lack of empathy for the employee's situation. Often times, the employee can only see their own perspective, because they don't have access to the manager's sources of information. Also, you should understand that sometimes people just want to vent - it is actually a good thing, because keeping it inside breeds resentment. So you want to encourage venting. In those situations what the employee expects from you is to listen and sympathize. That's it. Don't treat every negative statement as something that needs to get fixed. You'll just burn yourself out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
If I had serious complaints about a coworker and my boss told me he wanted a solution, I would tell him to fire the stupid coworker and hire someone competent. Then what exactly would you say?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
I'm going to chime in on the manager side. I can't stand it when employees come to me complaining about their coworkers like I'm going to drop everything and fire them just on their word. This is even worse when they complain about some other manager's employee. I hate to be reductionist, but the overwhelming amount of the complaining comes from a small handful of employees, and most of them will never be happy. Unless there is harassment involved or discrimination against a protected class, I'd much rather you suck it up and deal with the coworker you don't get along with than complain to me. On the other hand, if you came to me and said "John Doe in accounting isn't responding in a timely manner and I'd like you to work out a way for my tasks to get a higher priority," I could actually do something. And I would. On a completely unrelated note, a lot of advice is this thread can be summarized as "Don't be a lovely manager in the same way that my manager is a lovely manager." I personally believe that the reason we have so many lovely managers in America is because we don't treat management as it's on skill. Most companies seem to operate under the fallacy that a good employee makes a good manager. That's simply not the case. My only advice is to study your rear end off--on the order of 20-40 hours a week reading and taking coursework on-line or at a local college. When you fail, and you will, just like any other job, be self-reflective and study even harder to fix what you didn't do right. Everyone can be a better manager with education and experience, just like every other profession, yet very few people with the job title 'manager' actually study it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
swenblack posted:I'm going to chime in on the manager side. I can't stand it when employees come to me complaining about their coworkers like I'm going to drop everything and fire them just on their word. This is even worse when they complain about some other manager's employee. I hate to be reductionist, but the overwhelming amount of the complaining comes from a small handful of employees, and most of them will never be happy. This is the one single thing that annoys me the most, especially since sometimes the complaints are something I really do need to do something about. You don't have to be friends with your coworkers, but you should make a good-faith effort to develop positive working relationships with them. That said, sometimes people are going to keep causing problems and just need to go if they don't improve after some talks. Probably the one thing that's helped me the most is making conscious decisions about how to manage upwards, sideways, and downwards. All three are necessary to be able to earn trust and support from your boss (upwards), your peers (sideways), and your employees (downwards), though most people have trouble with at least one of them. For me, managing downwards is the hardest (I tend to give people too many chances before applying consequences, which is something I need to be very aware of when deciding what to do about some things), but that's not necessarily the case for everybody. I know a number of folks who struggle with managing sideways, for example. Knowing when and how to support other managers' initiatives is important for generating goodwill, but there's a balance there between things that help them succeed and things that are detrimental to your team (which needs to be your highest priority). But if you can pull it off, you can end up with a lot of people who have your back and can help you get things done when they've stalled going through the normal channels. Similarly, managing upwards is all about making your boss's job as easy as possible (distill information down to what's relevant and keep your boss in the loop; this includes bad news, as your boss can help correct things sooner if he or she isn't kept in the dark) and managing downwards is about making your employee's jobs easier (remove obstacles where needed, give them whatever guidance they need, etc.). The short of it is that a manager isn't somebody who directly produces something, so much as somebody who makes other people's jobs more effective, whether it's the people doing the actual production or other managers to aid in decision making or whatever, and your value to the company is directly related to how well you can do that (this goes double if your employees are themselves managers). Unfortunately, because it's such a nebulous definition, it's a lot easier for a bad manager to slip through the cracks for a while than it is for bad non-managerial employees to do the same.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 10:12
|
|
|
Ultimate Mango posted:I am personally a fan of the idea of Servant Leadership, and view taking care of my employees as job number one. It is amazing what happens when your team comes to open up and trust you on a level where you know what is happening in all aspects of their lives and their development happens not just at work, but in a well rounded way in their personal and professional lives. I really like the idea of servant leadership, but I lack enough empathy to go down that path. I'm not a touchy/feely person so it doesn't work for me. My personal style is somewhere in between situational, transformational, and authentic leadership. With some teams I'm more on one side rather than the other 2 at the time, but with the blend of the 3 it takes care of all the cracks in between. I'm also a huge fan of not being an rear end in a top hat to any of my subordinates, because that just creates a bad work environment. As a subordinate I hated to work for assholes, so why would I then want to be one to my subordinates? Looking to your team from the ground up gives you great ideas and more places to work with because even the most seemingly inexperienced person on your team can have some pretty good insight into other team members or even be a great sounding wall for others to bounce ideas off of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
swenblack posted:Unless there is harassment involved or discrimination against a protected class, I'd much rather you suck it up and deal with the coworker you don't get along with than complain to me. As a manager you honestly should have the tools to teach your employee how to handle these situations. Nobody said you had to intervene, but I'm unsure what you'd expect what resources are supposed to be available to the person to manage the situation. You put the person in a god awful situation having this attitude, because there's no way for them to solve it. enraged_camel posted:"Don't bring me complaints, bring me solutions" is the biggest crock of poo poo advice that gets circulated in the corporate world. 100% agree Also I am god awful at managing sideways. I can't figure it out besides by eventually having people respect my knowledge and letting things blow up in their face when they don't want to listen to my knowledge/advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Veskit posted:As a manager you honestly should have the tools to teach your employee how to handle these situations. Nobody said you had to intervene, but I'm unsure what you'd expect what resources are supposed to be available to the person to manage the situation. You put the person in a god awful situation having this attitude, because there's no way for them to solve it. Veskit posted:Also I am god awful at managing sideways. I can't figure it out besides by eventually having people respect my knowledge and letting things blow up in their face when they don't want to listen to my knowledge/advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
keykey posted:I really like the idea of servant leadership, but I lack enough empathy to go down that path. I'm not a touchy/feely person so it doesn't work for me. My personal style is somewhere in between situational, transformational, and authentic leadership. With some teams I'm more on one side rather than the other 2 at the time, but with the blend of the 3 it takes care of all the cracks in between. For example, which boss would you rather work for? Boss 1 says "You can have as much vacation time as you need," but doesn't take any time off herself. -or- Boss 2 says "You have 3 weeks of vacation per year and I expect you to take it," and does likewise while completely going off the grid as far as work is concerned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Kreeblah posted:This is the one single thing that annoys me the most, especially since sometimes the complaints are something I really do need to do something about. You don't have to be friends with your coworkers, but you should make a good-faith effort to develop positive working relationships with them. That said, sometimes people are going to keep causing problems and just need to go if they don't improve after some talks. This post didn't get enough love. I am very aware of the fact that I am NOT GOOD at managing up. I may actually be starting a new job soon and foremost in my mind is what I need to do to manage up better in this new role. It is so much of a blind spot for me that I don't actually understand why I am bad at managing up, but at least I know I'm not. In part I wonder if my communication style is part of the challenge. That and I may have had some poor managers teaching me how to be a manager managing up and gotten some bad advice. But thinking about it and trying to do it intentionally is great advice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
swenblack posted:I'm with you on this one. I'm a big fan of servant leadership as well as 360 degree leadership. I think we'd have more effective managers if subordinates opinions were a factor (amongst other things) in managers' performance evaluations. I tend to favor transformative behaviors as well, but don't discount directive leadership. Setting a clear standard and holding yourself as accountable to it as your followers enables authentic leadership. Your example there is causing me to take a rather difficult look in the mirror. I am probably number one but thought I was number two. 360 reviews are important to me and I'm still unhappy with my hopefully soon to be former employer for not supporting them in the past few years. They were really valuable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Ultimate Mango posted:This post didn't get enough love. I am very aware of the fact that I am NOT GOOD at managing up. I may actually be starting a new job soon and foremost in my mind is what I need to do to manage up better in this new role. It is so much of a blind spot for me that I don't actually understand why I am bad at managing up, but at least I know I'm not. In part I wonder if my communication style is part of the challenge. That and I may have had some poor managers teaching me how to be a manager managing up and gotten some bad advice. For me, managing up is trying to live the ideal that I try to get from the people I manage. I try to ensure that only the problems I send to my boss are problems that: a. He needs to address directly, either due to organizational politics or a higher level of authority than I have is needed to make a call b. I can solve, but know he will be more comfortable if I run my solution by him first c. I lack a specific resource needed to address the issue, whether material or knowledge-based. If the problem is of the 3rd variety, I do my very best to ensure that I am clear with what I need to finish a job. This is what I try to convey to the people who work for me, and I won't ask more of them than I am willing to do. My job as a manager is to make the organization as a whole run more efficiently. I know how much easier my job is when I don't have to worry that the day-to-day activities of my subordinates are being done well, and I try to do the same for my boss.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
Kreeblah posted:The short of it is that a manager isn't somebody who directly produces something, so much as somebody who makes other people's jobs more effective, whether it's the people doing the actual production or other managers to aid in decision making or whatever, and your value to the company is directly related to how well you can do that (this goes double if your employees are themselves managers). Unfortunately, because it's such a nebulous definition, it's a lot easier for a bad manager to slip through the cracks for a while than it is for bad non-managerial employees to do the same. One of the things I was fortunate enough to learn early on from one of my best contacts who is now a previous CA state educator of the year that teaches business at ivy league school du jour is to teach others how to do your job. This extends to other facets of any work environment, however it also has a greater amount of worth in the management category. This will do many things, a couple of which is it will transform others thinking of you from their manager to a human that they can actually speak with you on a 1 on 1 basis since you are obviously easily approachable at this point. The other is you can get a feel for who would make a great replacement of yourself so if you move upward, you can close to immediately improve your chain of command to strengthen your previous division. It ties back into servant leadership a bit as well, but most importantly it helps develop manager/subordinate relations to the point where your team, if previously uneasy because of previous possible terrible management, will come back into their groove and start performing again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
swenblack posted:I work my rear end off and honestly do my best to give my team an environment where they're empowered, their contributions are recognized, and they have to deal with the bare minimum amount of bullshit possible. Unfortunately, I'm not always completely successful. I'd much rather have people on my team that are able to overcome having to work with unpleasant people that I don't have the authority to fire, and who put up with having to do tasks below their skill level occasionally just to get things done. It's all about putting the team's interests above their own (for a low six figure salary, of course). There is a growing proportion of the workforce that complains constantly about not being the center of the universe, and all the whining makes the team less productive over all. And most of them sound like you: I took some time to mull this response over. I truly did, looked around, read up and thought it over. I think you're mean. I hope that's not how you manage, because you're just... mean. We weren't talking about how you hope that people are the way you want them to be, because that wouldn't make you a manager. There wouldn't be any thread if it were as easy as "I'd much rather this person do this" and leave it at that, because I would much rather have everyone do the work I assign them, shut up and make me look good. To give solid advice on how to deal with a subordinate who is complaining about another employee, I'll quote Alison Green on this one... Alison Green posted:You need to make it clear to them that these are the conditions, and whining and complaining isn’t acceptable. Let them know that you will hear them out once about a concern. (And do hear them with an open mind and act on their concerns if you determine they’re valid.) But you will not allow them to waste company time and poison the environment by complaining about those same items over and over; these items should be one-time conversations, not ongoing ones. They are expected to discuss their concerns like professional adults, accept the answer, and move on with their work. swenblack posted:You are completely useless on a project that requires more effort than one person, no matter how brilliant, can solve independently. To paraphrase "I don't know how to work with people, so I let them fail and tell them how much smarter I am." Do you see how this might be perceived as a problem? If this is something you want to improve, I'd highly recommend reading Dale Carnegie's book mentioned earlier in this thread. God still mean.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Veskit posted:We weren't talking about how you hope that people are the way you want them to be, because that wouldn't make you a manager. There wouldn't be any thread if it were as easy as "I'd much rather this person do this" and leave it at that, because I would much rather have everyone do the work I assign them, shut up and make me look good. To give solid advice on how to deal with a subordinate who is complaining about another employee, I'll quote Alison Green on this one... http://www.askamanager.org/2007/12/new-managers-and-authority.html It's pretty clear from the post that you cherry-picked that Green is talking about organizational policies, decision-making, and general items that might constitute "the way things are." She is not talking about the way that co-workers interact with one another. While yes, occasionally you will get an employee who will incessantly whine about another employee without real cause, and these should be treated as special cases, you absolutely, positively cannot take the "you get one time to complain about this" angle with behavioral issues, especially between your own staff. They may well be trying to get you to acknowledge a pattern of abusive behavior, even if each individual abuse is very minor, and creating a culture where people cannot complain about these things makes you personally liable for hostile work environments, sexual harassment, and other very serious issues that may occur between staff. Besides that, staff are people and need to vent. Don't let them trash-talk their coworkers to you, but if you're not letting people vent, you're not building the trust you need to excel as a manager either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
Veskit posted:I'll quote Alison Green on this one...
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
swenblack posted:Please tell me you didn't just Google "How do I manage a complaining employee?," and post the first link. Because I would have had absolutely no idea who Allison Green was unless Misogynist posted a link to her blog. No, but that's funny she was the first to pop up. Fair enough. I mostly agree with the last part.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
keykey posted:One of the things I was fortunate enough to learn early on from one of my best contacts who is now a previous CA state educator of the year that teaches business at ivy league school du jour is to teach others how to do your job. This extends to other facets of any work environment, however it also has a greater amount of worth in the management category. This will do many things, a couple of which is it will transform others thinking of you from their manager to a human that they can actually speak with you on a 1 on 1 basis since you are obviously easily approachable at this point. The other is you can get a feel for who would make a great replacement of yourself so if you move upward, you can close to immediately improve your chain of command to strengthen your previous division. It ties back into servant leadership a bit as well, but most importantly it helps develop manager/subordinate relations to the point where your team, if previously uneasy because of previous possible terrible management, will come back into their groove and start performing again. Succession development is a really important part of management. I have just been out for basically three weeks, and the team performed as they needed while I was gone. One of the team acted in my place and handled day to day operations, ran team calls, handled scheduling issues, etc. Another team member did a project that I may have done myself otherwise and they were very challenged but stepped up and did a great job for something they had never done before. I think it went so smoothly and I just came back and resumed the normal routine and it was like I wasn't ever gone. It's definitely nice when things run well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Ultimate Mango posted:Succession development is a really important part of management. I have just been out for basically three weeks, and the team performed as they needed while I was gone. One of the team acted in my place and handled day to day operations, ran team calls, handled scheduling issues, etc. Another team member did a project that I may have done myself otherwise and they were very challenged but stepped up and did a great job for something they had never done before. I think it went so smoothly and I just came back and resumed the normal routine and it was like I wasn't ever gone. It's definitely nice when things run well. That's funny, because my manager was on vacation for two weeks and things ran incredibly well without him. This isn't because he is good at "succession development" but because he's an incredible cretin who adds no value to the department whatsoever and is in fact an obstacle most of the time. Stress and annoyance levels were at their all time low while he was gone and everyone was very productive. Now that he's back though, everything is back to normal. The best part is that we had a meeting today that involved the division director, and our manager humble-bragged about how smoothly everything went despite his absence, as if it was his doing! I'm not saying you're like my boss of course. I'm simply providing another perspective.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
Veskit posted:As a manager you honestly should have the tools to teach your employee how to handle these situations. Nobody said you had to intervene, but I'm unsure what you'd expect what resources are supposed to be available to the person to manage the situation. You put the person in a god awful situation having this attitude, because there's no way for them to solve it. You can teach specific skills and techniques, but you're not going to truly change anyone as a manager. Veskit posted:Also I am god awful at managing
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:That's funny, because my manager was on vacation for two weeks and things ran incredibly well without him. This isn't because he is good at "succession development" but because he's an incredible cretin who adds no value to the department whatsoever and is in fact an obstacle most of the time. Stress and annoyance levels were at their all time low while he was gone and everyone was very productive. Now that he's back though, everything is back to normal. The best part is that we had a meeting today that involved the division director, and our manager humble-bragged about how smoothly everything went despite his absence, as if it was his doing! That's a good point. Succession planning is really a different beast than having things operate when a manager is out. Sure, a well trained successor can take the load off a manager, but it's different. I do always try to identify and develop people in the areas of both Management AND Leadership. Strong leaders who don't want to manage people are really great assets (maybe like an NCO) and having people ready for management promotion makes it easier for your employer to see you as someone ready for the next challenge (maybe even promotion).
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Thanks
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
Ultimate Mango posted:Succession development is a really important part of management. I have just been out for basically three weeks, and the team performed as they needed while I was gone. One of the team acted in my place and handled day to day operations, ran team calls, handled scheduling issues, etc. Another team member did a project that I may have done myself otherwise and they were very challenged but stepped up and did a great job for something they had never done before. I think it went so smoothly and I just came back and resumed the normal routine and it was like I wasn't ever gone. It's definitely nice when things run well. No-manager-around chat: I'd rather have a manager on vacation compared to having his admin on vacation. My team at a former company worked very closely with our VP (he sat 20 feet from us, a team of about 6), and his admin was on vacation. He was in charge of scheduling and organizing himself, which would be positively described as his "area of opportunity." But seriously if your team can't handle a couple weeks without a manager for day-to-day operations, there's a problem. I understand if there are other issues at hand, like approvals that need his/her signature, but otherwise, most things can wait. If a manager's job is to remove roadblocks, work around it for a bit until you can improve it. My team should be able to exist without me for at least a week, which is a good amount considering its a four/five week sales cycle every month. I have key account responsibility so for some questions, I am the only person to come to. Otherwise, my team communicates effectively with each other and can get questions answered. There's very few things that are defusing-the-bomb kind of urgent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
lazercunt posted:No-manager-around chat: I'd rather have a manager on vacation compared to having his admin on vacation. My team at a former company worked very closely with our VP (he sat 20 feet from us, a team of about 6), and his admin was on vacation. He was in charge of scheduling and organizing himself, which would be positively described as his "area of opportunity." Yeah I think I posted a retraction about real Succession Development vs. managing absences. That being said, I am changing jobs and have two people who could step into my old role. I kind of hope they open my old position for interviews since there have been several promotions that occurred with people just being appointed to manager or director roles, and there are some people who would benefit from the exposure for interviewing if not be straight up better for the role and get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Honestly being a good manager isn't that hard. I've managed people both in and out of the military and it's basically the same and all boils down to a few key things: 1. We're all people, while you're the one ultimately making the decision, you're not better than the people you manage so don't treat them as inferior. Basically treat everyone with respect 2. Be professional. Don't be buddies with your subordinates, but don't be a dick. It's ok to joke around but make sure it's at the appropriate time in an appropriate way. 3. Practice what you preach, if you want them to adhere to certain standards then you need to as well. 4. Be a mentor, you may have no clue how your dudes do what they do, but you ARE the manager so you must have done something right. Make sure to encourage and help them better themselves, they'll be better workers in the end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
JacksLibido posted:Honestly being a good manager isn't that hard. It is quite hard for your typical manager, because most people are promoted to management due to simply being productive workers. Upper management looks around, notices the rising superstar, and bam! makes them the manager of the department. Whereas the skillset required to be a productive worker is totally different than that required to be a good manager. This is why most managers get stuck in middle management and never move up: they have been promoted to their level of incompetence. The only way out of this predicament is to bootstrap oneself and dive into books, seminars, methodologies, etc. for the field of management science, and basically learn and absorb as much as possible. Some excellent books have been written on this subject. My favorites are those written by Peter Drucker, considered to be the father of the modern management discipline.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
Here's something that works for me: once a week (usually Thursday or Friday), go for a walk around the neighborhood and talk. It's basically a one-on-one, and topics covered range from challenges, victories or frustrations from the week, to life at home, movies, video games, music, etc. I use this time to get to know them a little better, to encourage a communication channel that is honest and non threatening. I find that walking in itself is what makes it work. Together, we see the neighborhood as things happen, weirdos walking around, construction on that corner, "the other day I saw a hooker getting dropped off over there", and that we carries on after the walk is over. I have only 2 directs, and it usually means that 1 hour of my week is spent walking and talking, not doing anything else. I would probably do it even if I had 10 directs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Alfajor posted:Here's something that works for me: once a week (usually Thursday or Friday), go for a walk around the neighborhood and talk. It's basically a one-on-one, and topics covered range from challenges, victories or frustrations from the week, to life at home, movies, video games, music, etc. This is a really good idea. What would you do if your directs were in other places? I have a team that stretches from Washington State to Florida. iSight go six months before seeing them in person because it's just not in the budget to fly to everyone more often...
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
Ultimate Mango posted:This is a really good idea. What would you do if your directs were in other places? I have a team that stretches from Washington State to Florida. iSight go six months before seeing them in person because it's just not in the budget to fly to everyone more often... GoPro + Oculus Rift. I can't help you with the remote problem, but I'd second the walking thing for anyone else curious about it. I've had a few managers over the years, and one of them went for walks pretty much daily and took 1-2 people with him each time. I'm not sure if that's why I liked him the best of all my managers, but it certainly helped. I can say that I knew more about him as a person than all my other managers, and I'm sure it went the other way too. In general, "talk to your workers about non-work things in a non-work setting" is good advice. Work-talk will invariably come up anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
I was recently interviewing for a management position. A VP asked me if I managed with a carrot or a stick. My response was an ear, ideally both of them. Management experience: - Managed big construction projects for 5 years - 3500+ homes built in N. Las Vegas, 1500+ in N. San Diego county. Hired and fired dozens of contractors/sub-contractors. - Been in technical management - both direct reports, matrix reporting structures, contractors and vendors - for over 10 years. Hired over 100 direct reports, written up about 10% of them, only had to fire one. A couple of things that I've learned: - When interviewing someone who's entry level, find out what they want to do and how they think this job is a step in that direction. "I'm here for the experience" is fine. "I'm here for the check", not so much. - When interviewing someone who's experienced, or is going to be a senior/lead <whatever>, they need to not only describe what they've done, but why they've done it. Should also be able to discuss how they've added value to whoever they're working for. No obvious red-flags: lying about past gigs, complaining about past gigs. - When hiring, I make sure that the concept of a "get acquainted" (probationary) period is clear to the candidate and supported by HR. At the end of that period, I ask myself ONE question: knowing what I know about this person having worked with them for [n] days, would I hire them? If the answer is yes, all good. If the answer is no, fire them. (this does not count for my only fired one person - I do not consider someone a hire until they've made it through this period successfully). If the answer is maybe, I have a verbal counseling session with them, which includes an Improvement Plan - generally with a 30-day remediation period. If it's not accomplished by at the end of the remediation period, then we move to written counseling, another Improvement Plan, and they either turn it around or they get walked. All of this probably sounds harsh when reading it, but it does a few things: - I've established that I set clear expectations. - I've established that I set a clear remediation plan for people who are not performing to expectations. - I've established that I will fire someone who cannot meet expectations or remediate. This helps set up an environment where people who perform will work with someone who isn't performing, because they know that if the person is unable to turn it around, they will be replaced. This solves a lot of the morale problems that come from ineffectual, passive-aggressive managers who are unable to fire someone who needs to be somewhere else. Given that I do a lot of work in a matrixed environment, some of the things that everyone I work with is clear on: - I do not refer to people as "resources". If managers choose to refer to people on their team as resources, that's their problem. They do not refer to people on my team as resources. - People are not vending machines. - I am allergic to surprises. I assume that everyone else is as well. - I do not get upset at bad news. I do get upset at bad news delivered 2 weeks after the fact because someone didn't want to give me bad news and waited until it was unavoidable. - When people need help, I provide them with whatever I can to help them: training, other people, or anything else. - When people start complaining without a solution, I smile and say "I'm sure you'll figure it out". I then end the conversation. - I have a half-hour one-on-one meeting with each of my direct reports. I spend no more than 5 minutes talking - generally only if there's some information that they need. The rest of the time I listen. It's a very tight format, everyone works off of the same format, and it doesn't vary. They get to spend 25 minutes (or more) every week talking about themselves. This builds a lot of trust and mutual accountability. Everyone is resistant at first. They all love it within about 90 days. - If I have too many direct reports to handle weekly one-on-ones with all of them, it's time to promote someone to lead. - ASAP is not allowed for anything - date and time for everything. That goes both ways. - If a meeting does not have an agenda, do not attend it. That goes both ways. - 15 minute stand-up with direct reports every morning on: What did you complete yesterday? What are you going to complete today? What do you need help with today? They are not checking in with me, they are checking in with each other. - 30 minute stand-up with team every week. Topics are limited to What do you want the rest of the team or other people on the team to know about? What do you need from them? I exist purely to serve and motivate - both of which are done via clear and explicit communications, in real-time or as close to real-time as possible. The people who work for me know that I have them covered, that I will take care of them, that I will do everything within my power to help them achieve their personal and professional goals, and they respond accordingly. Also, this: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3571852&pagenumber=217#post433878545 Feral Bueller fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Aug 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It is quite hard for your typical manager, because most people are promoted to management due to simply being productive workers. Upper management looks around, notices the rising superstar, and bam! makes them the manager of the department. Whereas the skillset required to be a productive worker is totally different than that required to be a good manager. This is why most managers get stuck in middle management and never move up: they have been promoted to their level of incompetence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Sarcasmatron posted:Freaking incredible post This post was totally amazing. Thank you. I am pretty excited to start my new gig next week. Totally fresh start with totally new people, my chance to be a great leader or to totally gently caress it up all on my own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
Sarcasmatron posted:- When people start complaining without a solution, I smile and say "I'm sure you'll figure it out". I then end the conversation. I said this earlier and I will say this again: it is YOUR job, as a manager, to find solutions to problems. If you expect your underlings to find the solutions to the problems they are complaining about, then you should promote them to your level and pay them the same salary that you're earning. If someone is noticing problems AND finding solutions, what value are YOU adding as the manager? None. It is your job as a manager to find out how to remove obstacles so your team can get their job done. The whole "don't complain without a solution" is simply a passive-aggressive way of dealing with complaints the manager doesn't like. Seriously, when I go to my boss and say "some idiot in IT deleted my project files from the network share", I don't want him to smile and say "I'm sure you'll figure it out." I expect him to get his rear end off his chair, go have a chat with the IT Director and have them come up with a plan for getting my files back. The attitude you demonstrate would make me resign on the spot, and I would definitely cite "ineffective management" as my number 1 reason for quitting. quote:- 15 minute stand-up with direct reports every morning on: What did you complete yesterday? What are you going to complete today? What do you need help with today? They are not checking in with me, they are checking in with each other. Expecting people to report what they did yesterday and what they are going to do today is the very definition of micromanagement. It stems from a mix of lack of trust in underlings ("is he actually working, or is he slacking?") and a desire to be aware of what said underlings are up to in case someone higher up asks. The manager covers his/her own butt, and this costs the team (15 x 4 x n / 60) hours every week, where n is the number of people who are forced the attend the standups every morning. And that doesn't even take into account the time it takes for people to get back fully into whatever they were working on before the meeting. The most effective manager I've worked with was a 58 year-old director who was totally allergic to meetings (especially when they involved his team members). Instead he set clear goals for projects and established a culture where everyone was expected to be proactive about communicating with each other and with him when the need arose. This guy was a legend in the entire company because his department had the highest retention rate and people in it were ridiculously amazing performers. Unfortunately he retired three months after I started, and the guy who took over was a member of the Agile cargo cult...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 10:59 |
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Seriously, when I go to my boss and say "some idiot in IT deleted my project files from the network share", I don't want him to smile and say "I'm sure you'll figure it out." I expect him to get his rear end off his chair, go have a chat with the IT Director and have them come up with a plan for getting my files back. The attitude you demonstrate would make me resign on the spot, and I would definitely cite "ineffective management" as my number 1 reason for quitting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 05:08
|
|