Stepping Forward Together: Creating Trust and Commitment in the Workplace. Mac Ph.D. McIntire
the front-desk staff. They supervise the production line while operating one of its stations. They cook with the cooks, design with the designers and write while managing the writers.
“The problem with this,” I continued. “is that when you’re a working manager, and push comes to shove and there’s not enough time in the day, which of these two responsibilities falls by the wayside: working or managing?”
“Managing,” Paul rightly surmised.
“Why?”
“Because the work has to get done,” Paul suggested.
“Right. The work has to get done. So when do managers manage?”
“In their spare time. Whenever they can.”
“Hence the problem,” I said. “Managers are managing whenever: whenever there is a crisis, whenever a problem comes up, whenever they have a minute, whenever they get around to it, whenever a situation forces them to deal with their employees. “The biggest problem with management today is managing is a spare-time, whenever job – not the primary focus of the manager. It’s no wonder there are so many management problems in so many businesses. Employees are being neglected because management is too busy working. Managers everywhere make sure the pressing production needs are met, but when the whistle blows at the end of the day they’ve neglected to manage their people. That’s why they fail to generate the enthusiasm and commitment necessary to achieve high levels of performance and greater profitability. By being singularly focused on results, they actually produce less results than they could if they’d take a greater interest in their employees.”
Paul was listening attentively. I could tell he was pondering what I was saying; no doubt mentally assessing how much time he and his managers spend managing their staffs.
“That’s what makes managerless management such a valuable leadership tool,” I continued. “If the reality of the workplace is that managers don’t have time to manage, then we have to create a work environment and organizational structure where employees can stay on task, meet performance standards, and be productive without close supervision. Managerless management entails putting in place systems and processes that allow employees to manage themselves without having a manager lording over them. Managerless management practices provide your workforce with the knowledge and understanding – or consciousness – they need to perform to standard with far less management oversight. It raises your employees’ consciousness level to your level of consciousness so they can do what you would do in the same situation.
“And guess what the best part is about getting employees to manage themselves? It frees you up to focus on other important issues – like strategically positioning your company for the future, monitoring the bottom-line, or interacting with the customers and employees. You know,” I chided again, “the stuff you’re supposed to be doing as the general manager of the company.”
“Oh, is that what I’m supposed to be doing?” Paul said, smiling.
“That’s the ultimate goal of both conscious management and managerless management: to get people to do what you would do the way you would do it without you having to be there. Conscious management is getting your employees to be so conscious about their work there is no need for you to be their consciousness for them. And the only way that can happen,” I reemphasized, “is when your employees know what you know, think what you think, see what you see, hear what you hear, feel what you feel, and sense what you sense. That’s what management is all about. Management is the transference of everything that is within your head, heart and gut so your employees become just as conscious as you are about the things the matter most at work. When that happens, everyone at your company will be going in the same direction at the same time.”
“Wow!” Paul exclaimed, falling back into his seat. “If you can tell me how to do that, that would be wonderful!”
It was fun to see Paul’s excitement. I couldn’t wait to tell him how to do it. I knew we’d be talking for a long time; probably until our plane landed in Las Vegas. I was looking forward to a great discussion.
2
The Definition of a Team
We had taken off and the plane was climbing toward our cruising attitude. The flight attendants were up from their jump seats preparing to serve the passengers the usual fare of drinks and pretzels. Paul and I were settling in for what I knew would be a very enlightened conversation.
“Paul, I know I’ve already given you a lot to think about and you’re anxious for me to tell you how to get everyone in your company committed to going in the same direction at the same time,” I continued, “but I need you to understand one more very important concept before I share a model with you.
“At the end of the day, what you’re really talking about when you say you want to get everyone going in the same direction at the same time is that you want everyone in your company to perform as a cohesive team,” I suggested. “Is that right?”
“That’s true,” Paul agreed.
“So I need to explain my definition of a team. My definition is so simple you can tell immediately whether you have a team or not.
“Paul, I’m sure in all the reading you’ve done over the years about managing you’ve probably read several books about teams and teamwork.”
Paul nodded.
“So you’ve probably come across several good definitions of what a team is. Some definitions you’ve read might be really great. They’re philosophical, profound and make you think. But others are trite and silly; like the poster you see on the wall that says: ‘There is no I in team.’ Give me a break!
“My definition of a team is so descriptive you can tell right away whether you have a team or not. My definition of a team is simply this: A team steps forward together.”
I paused momentarily to see Paul’s reaction.
“That’s it. A team steps forward together. No complex or convoluted descriptor. It’s that basic. That’s all you need in order to know whether or not you have a team.” I repeated.
“If you want to know if you have a team, all you have to do is ask yourself some basic questions: Are the people within your organization stepping forward together? Are your executives stepping forward together as they run your plant? Are the various departments within your company stepping forward together in a coordinated and collaborative effort to achieve your production goals? Are your union employees stepping forward together with management’s support to produce high-quality products for your customers?”
“Those are easy questions to answer,” Paul said, shaking his head. “They’re not”.
“Then you don’t have a team,” I declared. “Members of a real team, a cohesive team, step forward together. They move in the same direction at the same time. When the company says ‘go right,’ everyone moves to the right. When told to ‘go left,’ a real team shifts to the left – all in unison. All in agreement.
“When a real team has tasks to perform, everyone does his part without hesitation. No one says: ‘It’s not my job.’ Producing quality products and providing great service is everyone’s job. On a true team, there are no weak links; and there are no lone heroes. No one is left behind to take the blame; and no one steps forward alone to take the credit. A real team advances as a cohesive, singular entity. Members of a real team recognize themselves as part of a collective whole – not as individuals. And they act accordingly, by working in coordinated harmony.
“If anyone in any work group is not stepping forward with the rest of the group, then you don’t have a team,” I stressed.
Paul glanced out the airplane window, weighing his organization against my description of a true team. “That’s pretty straightforward. By that definition, it’s easy to spot teamwork – or the lack of it.”
“That’s what makes it a