Nobody sets out to be a micro-manager but there are many traps in complex organizations that can lead us to fall into inadvertent micromanagement. Once you are have started to micromanage it can be difficult to step back and restore the right balance of control and autonomy.

Here are a few of the micromanagement traps

• There are several factors that undermine trust - multi-site working, time zones, cultural differences and communicating through technology can all cause misunderstanding or unfulfilled expectations. When this happens managers often respond by increasing central control.
• Managers who have been promoted from problem solving jobs (particularly technical roles) have succeeded by solving problems fast. Without the necessary management training they may continue to show this behaviour in their people management roles. By being too helpful and solving problems themselves they dis-empower their people and effectively “train” them to bring all problems to the manager for solution.
• A higher level of management control may be appropriate (though micromanagement never is) when people are new to their jobs or economic conditions are critical. However, though companies are full of mechanisms for increasing control when they need to, there are rarely tools available to relax control when we can.

Nobody who has been on a training course or read a business book in the last 50 years can have missed the message that empowerment is good. Often the traps above lead us into inadvertent micromanagement. But once this pattern is established and escalation is the norm it can be hard to break out of.

We need to do this in a managed way that also builds trust and confidence in the manager and their people.

1. Build capability - it would be stupid to empower people who cannot do the job
2. Build confidence - use coaching to develop the confidence in both parties that they are able and willing to make decisions for themselves
3. Set up the right support levels so that both parties feel comfortable but not micromanaged.

Find out more about this systematic and managed approach to building autonomy and recovering from micromanagement.

Oct 20 2008

Perfect timing as I am in the Netherlands today working with a client on matrix management. My Book Speed Lead - faster simpler ways to manage people projects and teams in complex companies is now available in Dutch - see more at the publishers site here

Speed lead in Dutch

Oct 14 2008

Influence without authorityis a core skill in managing in a matrix organizations structure and is one important element included in our matrix working trainig program.

Your ability to get things done in a matrix organization structure depends in part on understanding what sources of power you have and when and how to apply them.

First we have to realize which of these types of power we have access to to get things done.

Second we have to consider what will be the consequences of using this style of power on our followers – this is rarely taken into account.

The first 3 traditional types of power have been rather undermined in the matrix organization structure.

Coercive – use of, or threat of force. This traditional style of power may no longer be available to you, strong worker protection in some parts of the world, or the need to retain talented people may mean this style is normally unacceptable. Even if this style of power is theoretically available to you the impact on your followers may be so negative that it negates the advantages of using it. This style of power may work in an emergency.

Normative- based on values and right to manage - most people accept that there needs to be some authority in organizations and many will buy in to the “values” of good organizations they work for. These “softer” forms of power are extremely useful in large complex organization as they sit in the background subtly influencing decisions “it’s the way we do things around here” - and just as this power becomes more useful it becomes more difficult to develop in large, diverse, matrixed  and multi-site organizations where true values may be different and developing a common approach is more time consuming and expensive.

Presence–  respect for the personal characteristics. This is great if you can develop it and we can all work to improve this one by earning respect. Multi-site and remote working makes this one more difficult to apply in complex companies - so when you do have the opportunity of presence use it to top up the “tank of goodwill” and reinforce relationships - not to deliver PowerPoint presentations to darkened rooms.

Four more useful types of power to develop in a matrix organization structure include

Expert power - from superior knowledge, skills & abilities. This is a really powerful one, if you are the world expert the matrix will flex around you to access your talent and knowledge.

Position - The power of role still has legitimacy in matrix management (particularly where solid lines make the “real” boss clear) but may increasingly be shared with others or be for short duration projects etc…

Reward - the ability to deliver rewards and punishments - still useful but may share the same limitations as position power above

Relationship - The power of trust, shared goals, sense of identification. These so called soft factors (which are actually hard and very effective) are excellent once you have them but time consuming to build - and easy to damage - particularly in reorganizations. The matrix structure can undermine trust, shared goals and identity. With very diverse groups of employees in different locations and timezones there are many opportunities for misunderstanding and misalignment.

If I was trying to build a power base to get things done as a matrix manager I would focus on expertise and relationships as a great place to start - if you have traditional authority that is a bonus in the matrix structure.

Need to develop these skills for yourself or your ognaization? Check out our training

What types of power work best in your company?

Oct 10 2008

Check out the latest podcast in our”Life in a Matrix” series. The subject is Matrix Management and in it Kevan Hall discusses - What is matrix management? Why do companies use it? and.. What are the key  matrix management people challenges that this type of organization can cause?

Check our the matrix management podcast on our sister blog.

Oct 08 2008

In the last 20 years, manufacturing industry has transformed product quality by decentralizing control over quality and giving the people close to the action the information and authority to make immediate decisions. Quality has improved, costs and down and job satisfaction is higher.

Over the same period, management control has become more centralized. In our survey of 1,200 managers in major multinationals 34% of managers thought their company already had too much central control and 43% felt they were moving to greater central control.

In the financial services industry we are about to see a massive increase in regulation as a result of government bail-outs. Empowerment is great in practice but if it means bankrupting the business or even the whole economy, then maybe central control is better?

So how do we create the autonomy and creativity we need to be successful and to retain great people in this tightly regulated environment?

In our work training over 50,000 people in more than 300 major multinationals around the world we have learned some simple principles for the effective exercise of control

1. Central control is an illusion.

At best, central control leads to delay whilst issues are escalated. In reality, by the time central control mechanisms find out about a problem, it is often many days or weeks after the activity took place. Many financial reports for example arrive 6 weeks or more after the money has been spent.

The only type of control that really works is control that is fast and close to the action. Catching their failure some time later does not really help.

2. Formal controls undermine a sense of responsibility

Rules and guidelines may have positive motivations but they breed an attitude of compliance without thought. Sarbanes Oxley cost a fortune but all that spending on compliance did not prevent recent excesses. So long as we follow the rules, we don’t have to consider what is right. A rule oriented culture can also encourage the belief that finding a way around the rule makes it OK
 
3. Rules are a fossil record of bad practice.

Typically organizations or regulators only develop rules when something has gone wrong (or they fear it will go wrong). Financial regulation is often designed to stop a recurrence of incompetence or dishonesty. As a result, we have to apply these rules to the vast majority of responsible employees as if they were incompetent or dishonest.

Rules are like a fossil record of the fears and failings of a company or an industry – and then we use them to run our companies by in the future!

4. Regulations get “gold plated” by nervous managers

Many companies take a regulatory regime and “gold plate” it, adding internal checks and systems to ensure compliance in a way that is usually more restrictive than the intention of the regulation.

Challenge your own internal regulation to make sure that you are not unnecessarily tightening the regulatory regime and strangling initiative in your business.

How do we break out of the control trap?

When I managed a manufacturing organization, I experienced a lot of escalation of issues. My managers regularly called me with questions in the evenings and weekends. At the time, I was learning Japanese quality control techniques which were focused on equipping line operators with the skills to exercise immediate control over the quality of their work and we were seeing fantastic improvements in productivity and quality.

I came to see these escalation calls as a signal that I had not given my managers the knowledge, skills or confidence to make decisions for themselves. Escalation is a failure of capability.

I made a note of all escalations I received and analysed them to understand what I needed to do to equip my managers to make the decision themselves next time. Next, I organized training or provided information to fill the gap in capability. Once I had provided the training, I would respond to escalation calls with coaching and support but would encourage people to find their own answers. Within 8 months, I had restricted escalation to only issues I wanted to know about.

So here is my simple 4 step approach to continuously building capability fast and close to the action.

1. At all levels of your organization get people to capture any issues that are escalated to them from the level below.
2. Analyse these as evidence of a capability gap at the level below.
3. Implement knowledge or skill training to fill the gap.
4. Use coaching to reinforce the learning – but don’t give the answer yourself if they should already know.

The key principle is to equip people at the lowest level possible with the knowledge and the capability to control their own work. Immediate local control is real control. The rest may satisfy regulation but is largely a delayed checking mechanism. Contact us to find out how you can use this apporach in your organization

If we want real control in our organizations, coupled with the ability to have the empowered and creative people we need to be successful and competitive, then we need to focus more on capability and confidence, and less on rules and regulations. It is going to be difficult to find this balance in the fiancial services industry over the next couple of years - unless it turns out that regulators and politicians know best!

Kevan Hall Is CEO of Global Integration and author of Speed Lead® faster, simpler ways to manage people projects and teams in complex companies.

Oct 08 2008

As I mentioned in my previous post, I have been working on the subject of trust for a revision of our remote and virtual teams training - see previous post on trust  for some references and background.

One of the findings from the academic trust research is that high trust teams do not focus too much on trust in the early stages. They focus on getting on with the work and discussing what needs to be done and how. We see this clearly in the kick-off programs we run for virtual teams and projects. 

In the beginning of a virtual team people are keen to get on with the work, they have little experience of each other yet but are normally willing to give people the benefit of the doubt. If trust is an issue at the first meeting then you really have a problem - probably caused by past trust breaches.

What does cause problems however is lack of clarity on what the purpose of the virtual team is and what individuals should be dong after they leave the kick-off.

If teams start fast and start to deliver quick wins then trust grows as a result of performance.

So our job as managers is to create an environment where people can succeed and provide some social opportunities (as a by product of the interactions on purpose) for people to begin to get to know each other.

Detailed interventions on relationship building and trust at too early a stage may actually get in the way.

Find out more about our remote and virtual teams training

Oct 07 2008

I have been researching trust for the next update to our remote and virtual teams training. We have included this topic since 1994 and developed some practical tools for building trust in an environment where we can rarely get face to face and are cooperating across cultures and through technology.

At the same time, trust has become a hot topic for social research. I just finished reading 2 good reviews/summaries of the trust literature.

Handbook of Trust Research Edited by Reinhard Bachman and Akbar Zaheer and Organizational Trust Editd by Roderick M Kramer.

It is nice to see so many of the “common sense” things that good managers actually do to build trsut in virtual teams being confirmed by the research. We have always said to participants in our sessions on trust that we all know how to be trustworthy in principle and we all know how to build trust (and what damages trust) The problem is that under pressure of time or inattention we sometimes don’t actually do it.

An exception to this may be in the area of cross-cultural trust. For 2 reasons

1. People tend to attribute more trust in the early stages of virtual teams to people they consider as more similar to them. Conversely it can be harder for people from outside the “in-group” to establish trust and overcome any pre-existing stereotypes.
2. Different cultures have different expectations about how relationships and trust are formed, how the hierarchy is managed and how communication should work. When these expectations are unwittingly not met by people from other cultures with different expectations, this can undermine trust

These and other issues of building trust in remote and virtual teams need to be addressed right at the start so we create the conditions for trust to develop fast. Perceptions set at this early stage can form fast and be very hard to change remotely.

However the focus should not be on trust itself but on simply getting on with things - as we will see in the next post.

Find out more about our remote and virtual teams and tools for cross cultural success training programs.

What has worked well for you in building trust in virtual teams?

Oct 06 2008

Many training organizations approach cross cultural training from the perspective of knowledge and tips on cross cultural practices - and a little knowledge can be very helpful - particularly in contexts like greetings where you only get one chance to make a good impression - as in our cross cultural cartoon below.

Cross cultural training tips from www.global-integration.com

However this is not the most valuable part of cross cultural training. Much of the basic knowledge you can get from books - a much more cost effective and convenient way to get access to this information.

If you try to absorb all this detail in a cross cultural training session it makes for boring training and participants do not retain all the detail. Best is to pick up a guide on a specific country you are visiting and read it on the trip or have a regional or global guide such as the Kiss Bow and Shake Hands series to look up the specifics before you go.

In training thousands of participants in cross cultural skills we have learned that cross cultural training should focus on the skills of diagnosing and understanding cross cultural differences and learning what to do about these differences in practical business settings like meetings, projects and decision making.

Find out more about our tools for cross cultural success training. Listen to our podcast on cross cultural skills development. See more of our cartoons

What was the most important cross cultural skill that you learned in your career so far?

Oct 02 2008

Face to face contact is essential to getting things done in remote and virtual teams - it may always be the best and most comfortable for us a human beings. But time, cost and carton mean that we cant always get face to face in a distributed organization.

Because of ths we have no choice as managers of remote and virtual teams but to prioritise our face to face time rigorously to get the very best value from it. 

For example you can build relationships remotely, we can all think of people we “know” and work with who we never met face to face- but it takes more time and in a serious situation do you know you could absolutely rely on them?

A second good reason to get your remote or virtual team face to face is where you genuinely need participation, involvement or interaction of a group of people, what I call spaghetti team working. 

Thirdly, things like one to one discussions on sensitive issues like career or appraisal.  I think we show people respect by doing this face to face.

Fourthly there are things like celebration and recognition which are just hard to do remotely so maybe we need to put more focus on these issues when we are face to face. 

Our experience of facilitating hundreds of remote and virtual team projects is that the biggest impact and the number one for reason for travel should be project or activity kick offs.  A well run kick off can reduce project cycle time by 25% or more and also reduce the need for total travel during the project by getting the ways of working agreed at the start. 

So what about the worst reasons for travel – ones where you should really push back and say no?  Well I would certainly start by challenging the need for many internal meetings.  I would also look at the flip side to our good reasons for travel, so if you already know people well, if the purpose is to be presented to or given information rather than participation, if it can be delivered through technology then it is certainly worth challenging the travel or trying alternatives.

Find out more about our remote and virtual teams training or managing without travel programs.

What do you think is the worst reason you have to travel at work?

Sep 29 2008

Matrix management is not so different right at the top of organizations. If you are the most senior matrix manager then everyone still works for you! At the top of the functions, business units and geographies there are a small group of managers who themselves only have one boss and for whom the exercise of personal power can still get most things done even they don’t have a formal reporting relationship in the matrix management structure.

As a result, there is a tendency for these people at the top to underestimate the impact that the matrix has on the matrix managers below them.

In addition to this, because their environment has changed less they may tend to assume that the legacy management behaviours that worked in the pre-matrix days are appropriate to matrix management. In fact senior managers reverting to pre-matrix behaviors can cause big problems for the rest of the new matrix organization as managers try to “get things back under control / the way it used to be”

The role of these senior matrix managers is critical. They need to be advocates and sponsors of the principles of matrix management. This is particularly challenging for the next level down of matrix managers who do have dial reporting and often feel that they have lost control or power in the matrix management structure.

The key challenges for senior matrix managers include

• Creating a clear rationale and value proposition for matrix management – and communicating and modeling it.
• Dealing with political and legacy cultural barriers to the success of matrix management (including removing senior managers who cannot adapt to matrix management)
• Building matrix management skills throughout the management population and reinforcing good matrix management practices.
• Sponsoring and building the networks and communities needed to make matrix management work.
• Providing high level clarity on direction to allows the competing priorities that inevitably arise in matrix management to be resolved in the interest of the organization as a whole.

Further into the middle of the organization are matrix managers who operate where the matrix reporting lines intersect, we call them the matrixed middle - more on matrix management at this level in a future post.

See more about our approach to matrix mangement training or some of the other matrix management issues we see in our matrix organization consulting

Check out our dedicated “Life in a Matrix” blog with ideas, podcasts and other resurces on matrix management

Do your senior matrix manages do a good job of leading in the matrix?

Sep 25 2008