.MANAGEMENT DIRECTION

The direction we take in our jobs, and the decisions we make about what we do, how and when we do it, are influenced by many sources. Some are internal such as our conscience and previous experience and some are external such as requests from others or reading a trade journal. The same goes for our employees.

They get their direction from many sources, some of which we have a strong control over such as company directives, rules, policies and procedures. But we have little control over things such as their personalities and personal preferences, previous schooling and training, pressures from family, friends and clients, cultural and religious influences, former jobs and other past experiences. Some employees may even come to work with their own well developed personal mission or quest.

What is important to note is that you can't presume that these many influences won't conflict, in some way, with how you would prefer jobs to be performed in your organization. You can't pick who you believe are the best people, as I have seen some do, and then turn them loose to do what they think is best. That only invites chaos. And in fact the new theory of "chaos" would warn us that no matter how carefully we select employees, we can never know enough about their background (chaos theory would call this the "initial conditions") to predict their future behavior. Humans are too complex.

I frequently advise managers to remember that what is intuitive for them is probably not intuitive for their employees; if for no other reason than they have different backgrounds and life experiences. Whatever influences you to do and think the way you do is not the same as what influences your employees. So if you provide little to no direction to employees and rely on their common sense to lead them, they probably won't end up where you want.

There are , however, many "things" or "tools" which you can use to influence and control the direction your employees take. These tools are, first of all, your organization's mission statement (often accompanied with operating principles), and secondly, a large set of specific directing documents such as policies and procedures.

Mission Statement and Operating Principles

A Mission Statement and a set of Operating Principles are currently popular tools used to help focus an organization (whether a whole organization, only one division or a department) and to provide a fundamental point of reference for the direction used by individuals. Increasingly, executives are finding that Mission Statements and Operating Principles are a valuable foundation for building and leading their enterprises. Overall, Mission Statements have two fundamental elements - a framework for others, including employees, to understand the organization's purpose and an emotional appeal with which people can identify.

As policies, job descriptions or job priorities are changed or developed, the mission statement could be used to test whether the proposed new policy or priority, complements the raison d'être of the organization or of the department. In this way, the Mission Statement can provide both the rallying cry of the organization or work group, and a litmus test for judging the appropriateness of new initiatives.

Tools for Specific Direction

Every organization has at its disposal a large set of tools for clarifying direction which can be grouped into two categories: direction tools which relate primarily to performance outcomes or results; and direction tools which relate primarily to performance inputs or behavior. These categories, which are not mutually exclusive and have some overlap, are derived from the following simple concept which is central to The Mansis System:

BEHAVIOR RESULTS

This figure symbolizes that employee behavior, (what people do on the job, or their activities) leads to results. We hire people to achieve "results" such as completed sales or a level of customer service, or outputs such as material products, data, information reports, advice, or inventions. One form of direction to our employees, then, is what the results of their labours should be. The better they know what the results should be, the better able they are to focus their efforts and achieve the results. Examples of "results" tools are goals, performance standards and financial budgets.

But although it's "results" we want from our employees, it's just as important that we make it very clear "how" we want the job done. Sometimes the right results, achieved the wrong way, can be disastrous - such as making a product but with excessive waste, or closing a sale in a rude manner, damaging the possibility of future sales, or completing a task while alienating co-workers. When direction is communicated, both employee behavior and results need to be considered. Examples of "behavior" tools are job descriptions, priorities, policies, procedures, and performance factors.

Key Concept

The different tools or sources of direction for your employees include the following: expectations, policies, procedures, priorities, job descriptions, goals and action plans, performance standards, resource budgets, performance factors, and the organization's mission.

Whether you like it or not; whether you pay attention to these different sources or not: they all exist. You can't wish them away or ignore them; they will all be there to influence your employees. You have no choice. These all need to be clarified with your employees.

For example, whether you have documented job descriptions for your employees or not; they exist anyway. Because if you don't define the job, the employees will "figure out" what they presume is the job and act accordingly.

Whether you establish what your employees job priorities should be, or not; they'll do it anyway and intuitively allocate their time.

Whether you make it clear what your performance expectations are for every employee or not, they will "figure out" on their own what they think makes sense.

If you don't make it clear what the preferred procedures are for a job, procedures will be developed and used anyway, and probably not exactly what you would have wanted.

If you don't make it clear what your policies are for specific situations, employees will use their own initiative and base their decisions on what they assume are your policies. But what are the consequences if they're wrong?.

In other words, if you don't fill in all the gaps in the direction your employees receive, be prepared that someone else will; maybe the employee, maybe their coworker, who knows? And if so, you run the risk that what the employee presumes you expect, usually in good faith, isn't on the mark. As a result you get performance problems, errors, lowered employee self-confidence and morale, wasted money, time, momentum and effort - all of which could have been prevented if you took the time to make sure that performance expectations were clear and specific.

What About Creativity and Freedom ?

You're probably wondering can't there be such a thing as too much direction? When does direction reach the point of meddling or smothering initiative and creativity?

And of course there can be too much direction, and yes we don't want to eliminate creativity and initiative. But how much specific direction the employee wants should not be your guide; rather, how much specific direction is required. The rule of thumb is to make sure that direction is clear enough and in enough detail so that both you and the employee have the same understanding of the performance expectations. If you have expectations regarding how a job is to be done or the required results, there's no sense in keeping them secret. It is simply illogical to let employees fail because we refused to let them know what we wanted. Playing mind games with employees is a disrespectful, selfish, power trip and has no place in management practice. Only if you have no expectations about what an employee is to do or achieve in a job would you not seek to clarify direction. But that situation should never exist.

What about freedom to perform? Employees need that, but give them that freedom once they know what to perform and in what context. In other words, give them some structure - direction, parameters, limitations, etc. The philosopher Erich Fromm once wrote: "True freedom is not the absence of structure - letting people go off and do whatever they want - but rather a clear structure that enables people to work within established boundaries in an autonomous and creative way."

From: Robert H. Kent, The Mansis System: Common Sense Management For Everyone, Winnipeg: Pragma Press, 1996, pp. 3.1 - 3.6.

See also: Robert H. Kent and Gordon Simpson, Chicken Stew For Management, Winnipeg: Pragma Press, 1997, for an excellent collection of short articles on leadership and managing performance.

Back to Table of Show Themes