In the most simple terms — a manager is someone who is responsible for leading a team toward common objectives. Applying this premise to the specific context of a work environment usually generates numerous prescriptions about what makes a good manager. Of course, it would be amazing to find the managerial counterpart to the philosopher’s stone. But while the jury is still out on whether the philosopher stone exists, the manager’s stone definitely doesn’t. In other words, turning good ol’ rusty Joe into a gold standard, Manager-with-a-capital-M Joe requires more than a “one size fits all” solution.
Therefore, in order to distinguish myth from reality when it comes to being a good manager, we have to look at management from a first principles perspective. Namely, we have to analyze the fundamental concepts on which management theory is based. Is management about talent? Can it be taught? Or is it, as I believe, less about the title “manager” and more about frequent communication and coaching?
The Talent Argument
According to Gallup’s 2015 “State of the American Manager,” only 1 in 10 managers have high talent to effectively manage others. What does “high talent” mean? Gallup’s definition of high talent sites a combination of the following abilities:
- To motivate employees to take action and engage them with a compelling mission and vision;
- To have the assertiveness to drive outcomes and the ability to overcome adversity and resistance;
- To make decisions based on productivity (not politics);
- To create a culture of clear accountability;
- To build relationships that create trust, open dialogue, and full transparency.
According to the study, the majority of managers in America are simply in the wrong role because, instead of managerial talent, people are promoted in managerial positions based on previous success in a non-managerial role, or tenure within their company. While I certainly agree that these abilities make an amazing manager, something doesn’t feel right about going “all in” on talent as a prerequisite for managerial success.
Sure, some people are natural leaders. However, how can we assess one’s potential to help others succeed without actually putting them in an environment where they can prove themselves? The study suggests using talent audits and assessments to find and develop naturally talented managers, but doesn’t that sound a bit too concrete for a practice which, after all, deals with human beings with their own complex emotions and biases? To go deeper, we have to analyze the type of thinking that goes beyond skills and talents and into the art of management.
The Education Argument
According to internationally renowned academic and author Henry Mintzberg, effective management happens at the intersection of art (insight), craft (experience), and science (analysis). Mintzberg’s book, “Managers Not M.B.A.s,” outlines the benefits of experience-based management, which emphasizes developing managers, rather than educating them. According to him, we have to make an important distinction between specialized training in the functions of business and the practice of managing which involves an intensive personal experience.
“If people want to be managers, there’s a better route to it: get into an industry, know it, prove yourself, get promoted into a managerial position and then, go to a program that uses managerial experience explicitly not other people’s cases, but your own experience.”
“There are no natural surgeons. But there are all kinds of natural managers, people who are hugely successful and never spent a day in management class. It’s not a science or a profession. It’s a practice.”
Mintzberg, during a debate on the merits of business education
Perhaps you are aware of the “boss versus leader” meme that often comes up on our social media feeds:
Although I am sure no MBA program aims to create authoritarian, fear-inducing managers, focusing on the analytical aspects of management could undermine the “soft skills” needed to be an effective leader. Nevertheless, generalizing MBA’s as useless is ill-advised, because there are quantifiable professional benefits which can be acquired from an MBA, such as a network of connections and advanced skills. The point of contention for people like Henry Mintzberg is that these benefits have to do with business functions and skills in areas like finance, marketing, accounting etc., rather than creating fully developed managers.
Management as a Practice
In a lot of ways, the HR disruption movement is allowing managers to refine their practice by making it easy to communicate with employees. The companies that are dipping their toes in the field of People Analytics are essentially providing services which facilitate “soft skill” processes like engaging, coaching, and developing employees, while providing the hard data needed to make informed decisions. Although high talent and MBA credentials might make it easier for new managers to lead, there’s no shortcut to gaining the real-life experience required to be good at managing. Therefore, what makes a good manager is the dedication and awareness of an experience-based practice which embraces frequent feedback, a sense of progress, and employee development.