by William Barclay | Mar 20, 2025 | Management
Definitions of effective management often run along the lines of ‘the achievement of goals through the organisation and oversight of resources and people’. And very often there is a focus on planning, organising, directing, and controlling—principles first articulated by Henri Fayol, a French mining engineer and management theorist in 1916. Managees tend to regard a good manager as someone who nurtures positive working relationships but while this is likely to be beneficial, it is no guarantee of success.
Three observations can help provide a clearer picture: (1) successful managers utilize a range of approaches and have various personality types; (2) what successful managers do can rarely be copied so as to allow others to be equally successful; (3) the success rates of those chosen for management positions varies widely.
Management Field Theory recognises that good managers navigate the complexities of guiding people and managing resources amidst a constantly changing environment—a field in the scientific sense —to achieve goals established by the field. The field is shaped by many factors which can include the viewpoints of stakeholders, clients, and staff, along with external influences. Necessary management responses may involve delivering outputs, maintaining and improving customer satisfaction, controlling costs, addressing employee attitudes, responding to social and environmental factors and managing internal politics, historic organisational issues and recovery situations nd in addition to setting the requirements, the field can impose constraints on the means by which they can be met.
Effective managers exhibit sui generis characteristics that connect strongly with their field, facilitating their success. They do not need to embody every ideal trait or possess a comprehensive Fayol-type skill set. Crucial strengths may include customary skills such as organisation and planning but will also encompass some other qualities such as drive, motivational skills, creativity, sound judgment of individuals, the ability to foster trust, resilience, emotional stability, and a strong set of values and behaviours. Some of these abilities and traits may be challenging to identify in the short term and are often impossible to fully replicate. But one or two of them can be crucial for a field connection. The personality type of a manager is of lesser significance.
To maintain their effectiveness, managers must remain responsive to the evolving dynamics of their field. The process of hiring and assessing managers frequently falls short because many leaders and recruiters lack a solid grasp of Management Field Theory. Such misunderstandings can also lead individuals to pursue managerial positions whilst having a limited understanding of what the role involves. And the complex nature of the fields often leaves employees, particularly those new to the workforce, struggling to judge management accurately.
What makes a manager effective?
Ultimately, the major determinant of effective management is not the possession of a standard and constrained skill set —it’s the possession of specific and distinctive atrributes providing for effective functioning in the field!
by William Barclay | Oct 21, 2023 | Management, management inspection
When an Inspector Calls
Anthropologists tell us that a major reason for the success of the human race is our ability to communicate with and learn from each other. So what’s not to like about workplace inspections? It is hard to avoid them: process compliance; public service delivery; health and safety; fair trading; facilities; IT security; hygiene. We can surely learn from the experience and wisdom of others who look at the way we are doing things. And certainly some inspections do result in improvements or even transformations. But sadly in many others a shadow falls between the idea and the act – a shadow dark enough to produce climates of fear and deep foreboding.
Effective inspection requires a depth of knowledge and experience on the part of the inspector which includes the constraints and exigencies of the working environment as well as the direct organisational processes. Inspectors with such a breadth of skill can be difficult to find. Unawareness may mean that an inspection is shallow and confined to comparing work centres, devoid of more fundamental scrutiny. It can also lead to the absence of proposals about paths to improvement – a major missed opportunity.
The inspector-inspectee relationship often has a major power imbalance. Psychologists tell us that power diminishes a person’s capacity to take the perspective of others and perceive emotions accurately. It may also cause those possessing power to have stricter standards for others than for themselves and even to dehumanise those down-power to them. Inspectors require maturity: they face the considerable challenge of working with power compassionately and skilfully.
On some occasions, inspectors can be under external political pressures that favour negative outcomes – for example when leaders perceive a need to demonstrate to stakeholders a confrontational internal management approach or to respond to apparent reputational difficulties. This can seriously skew an inspector’s approach and can increase the likelihood that headlines of reports will be based on a small unrepresentative number of outcomes presented in a manner designed to create impact.
Here is a Real-World Management instrument for judging an inspection. The TT rating is a continuous scale, ranging from (i) transformative for highly beneficial to (ii) tragic for highly damaging.
Start on the basis that the inspection could be 100% transformative. Then consider each of the features below. They may or may not apply to your inspection. If a feature does apply, subtract a proportion of effectiveness from 100% that you judge to be appropriate. Possible ranges for these factors based on the experiences of Real-World Management are indicated.
Driven by higher political imperatives 20-100%
Inspector lacks knowledge or experience or exigence-awarness 20-80%
Inspector lacks capability to deal with inspector-inspectee power imbalance 20-80%
Headline outcome based on unrepresentative features 20-100%
No reference to means of improvement 20-100%
A positive final rating means the inspection has some degree of effectiveness; above 80% could be transformative. A negative rating indicates a tragic inspection. Ratings of different minus magnitude may be obtained – measures of the extent of the tragedy.
Disquiet about inspection is not new. The famous words of the American president Theodore Roosevelt in a 1910 speech are worth remembering:
‘It is not the critic who counts: not the person who points out how the strong person stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the person who is actually in the arena….’
by William Barclay | Sep 9, 2023 | Management, talent management
Managers – are you talent miners and talent champions? The talents of staff are a principal business resource. Identifying, developing and deploying them are accomplished management skills that can make a major contribution to top-line performance.
Two key aspects of talent management lie outside formal performance and personal development processes. One of them, often neglected, is the recognition of potential capabilities of staff and the putting in place of measures allowing them to be expressed. As the management writer Marcus Buckingham identified, it is often more beneficial to bring out capabilities that exist rather than trying to put in those that are absent. Recruitment alone is unlikely to result in a complete complement of necessary skills. Capabilities mean any attribute that can benefit the organisation whether in direct operational work or support functions. Individuals may directly demonstrate their potential. But they may not do so prominently– and a special ability of skilled managers is to recognise potential that may be evinced only by small signs. What aspect of the work does an individual enjoy? What are they most interested in? What pleases them? What are their self-management skills like? What aspects of the business do they complain (and therefore care) about? Do their outside interests provide a pointer? The recognition of such indicators is a continuous management responsibility: performance management should not be made up solely of isolated management-staff interactions. Crucially there may be opportunities, once potential capabilities are identified, to modify the duties of job roles – or even to create new roles – to allow the capabilities to be developed and fully expressed. The result: better operational efficiency and likely wider benefits to teamwork, motivation and morale. Crackerjack management!
The second aspect is the management of star performers. They are often a vital contributor to business success. Possessing high skills alongside self-starter and innovation abilities, they consistently get results. In mainstream tasks their contributions may often be more than three times higher than the mean level. In demanding and special circumstances, it may be comparatively off the scale. It is the manager’s responsibility to keep these individuals in roles where they can make the most telling contribution. But maintaining their performance levels may be a distinct test of management skill. Pragmatism and effective navigation through group dynamics are likely to be required. The accustomed principle of treating individuals in the same way may have to be put aside to a degree. Star performers must be told by management that their contribution is recognised and valued. They should be provided with unswerving support even when they make good-faith mistakes. Understanding their motivations may not be straightforward. Stars are very likely to value autonomy and novel opportunities. Some like formal recognition and outward signs of status. But it is unwise to believe they are all unconcerned with direct material rewards. Limited tolerance towards staff with lesser skills may be evidenced by them which may generate tension. Their peers may be jealous of their abilities and treat them disrespectfully. Repeated and carefully weighted interventions by managers may be required.
So managers – make sure that those staff capabilities are expressed! Emperor Nero had some wisdom- he said ‘hidden talent counts for nothing’.
by William Barclay | May 8, 2023 | Luck, Management
A Manager Looks at Luck
Managers can easily make excuses for alleged underperformance. Inadequate resourcing, a lack of support from above, unrealistic expectations, and inadequate staff capabilities are some of the explanations most often advanced. But can achievement sometimes be beyond the control of managers? Can failures be down to bad luck? Many managers would give a resounding yes to the question, even the most excuse-averse of them.
Theorists about luck tend to fall into two schools of thought: the prevailist and the opportunist. Prevailists believe that success or failure is frequently due to good or bad luck. They think luck often prevails over talent and effort, and is blind to all levels of self-belief. Opportunists hold that what people regard as good luck is actually following through on opportunities that arise. In their view it depends on how people regard their own lives and how much they retain a positivity of attitude. It is fair to say that prevailist theories have gained much the greater acceptance, overwhelming so amongst experienced managers.
Bad luck in a career can be thought of as three main types: personal; decisional; and occupational. Personal bad luck can include the social and economic circumstances into which one is born. Nationality, gender and ethnicity can all amplify or diminish a person’s potential. Decisional bad luck occurs when a manager’s workplace decisions turn out to have unpredicted negative consequences. Even when made properly and in good faith, decisions can be undermined by events beyond a manager’s control, sometimes with major negative consequences. Occupational bad luck occurs when factors outside a manager’s control preclude success. They could include: the values and personality of the boss; the organisational culture; the nature of objectives and targets; the behaviour of peers; and the inherent capabilities of staff.
So how can the extent of occupational bad luck be assessed so as to guard against excuse fall-back? Try the Real-World Management 7-point Occupational Luck instrument. Rate your current occupational luck against the following. Give each factor a rating of between 1 and 5. A 5 rating means yes, completely; 1 means completely not.
- The nature of your work is inherently interesting to you
- All that is being asked of you is achievable
- The work environment has little or no favouritism
- You have a good working relationship with your line manager
- You find your work colleagues on the whole to be good to work with
- The staff working for you have inherent capabilities appropriate for what is asked of them
- The pace of change does not impose high levels of stress on you.
Score your occupational luck like this:
30 -35 plenty of luck
25 -30 reasonable amount of luck
15 -25 deficient in luck
0 – 15 seriously deficient in luck
So what can be done? To be clear: bad luck can override everything and be beyond your control. But luck can be managed so to minimise the negative impacts and accentuate the positive. Here is a luck management scheme:
1. Recognise that luck exists and develop a real-world mental model of it. Visualise your future career and the almost certain occurrence of good and bad luck episodes. See yourself making the most of the good and being resilient through the bad
2. Increase the likelihood of having good luck by being proactive in your work. Show initiative. Seek a positive differentiation from others
3. Further increase the likelihood by developing personal work networks through professional acquaintanceship
4. Try not to let your thoughts be dominated by personal bad luck. Difficult as it may be, try to use any such factors as motivators
5. Recognise that decisional bad luck happens. Avoid self-blame. Seek to understand why your decisions had negative consequences. Don’t let them be a route to timidity
6. Assess your occupational luck carefully. Consider the likelihood of bad luck changing. In bad luck situations, do not shy away from considering a role or job change
7. Make the most of good luck by using it as a strong motivator. Put in a special effort. Be modest about your resulting achievements but don’t slip into imposter syndrome. Ignore detractors.
Look luck in the face!
by William Barclay | Feb 19, 2023 | Management
Managers know that staff motivation and job satisfaction are different things. The management approach necessary to deliver them has been subjected to a great deal of analysis. Which influences on staff are most significant today? My experience of staff in the English public services (caution: they are a distinct group, things may be different for others) suggests to me that there are six main influences: pay; comparative status; professional achievement; relationship with the line manager; the working environment; and the social environment.
Pay means bonuses, merit awards, access to overtime etc as well as the salary/wage level.
Comparative status means the extent that an employee believes his or her status exceeds that of peers in respect of such factors as job title, job level and the possession of special responsibilities.
Professional achievement means gaining recognition for the possession of distinctive personal knowledge and expertise. It may also include a sense of having helped customers and others.
The working relationship with the line manager means the extent to which the line manager has a positive regard for his/her contribution. It may also mean the extent to which he/she is more successful in this regard than his/her peers.
The working environment means such factors as the availability of flexible working, the quality of the physical workplace, easy travel and an active health and safety approach.
The social environment means the general level of mutual personal regard within the group and the existence of opportunities for social interaction.
These influences have the following characteristics:
- they can act on both motivation and job satisfaction
- their significance varies for different employees
- their relative importance often changes over time
- they can act in both positively (their presence benefits motivation and satisfaction); or negatively (their absence impairs)
- the removal of influences impairing satisfaction may not improve motivation
- the presence of motivating factors does not necessarily improve job satisfaction
- the same influencers can have a positive effect on some employees and a negative effect on others.
Managing the staff means managing the influences! #motivation #jobsatisfaction
Comments welcome
