Why managing takes time
I wrote last week in defence of managers. Managing is a much maligned, and under-valued, activity - but one that is a powerful tool for building (and maintaining) a high-performance culture, if you do it right.
I ended the post by saying we have to accept that if we want people to be good managers, we have to allow them the time to do it.
But why do I think it takes time? And why isn’t it just something we can automate away?
1. Management is about relationships.
That’s the point I keep making in this Subtack: good relationships are essential to high performance, and that it’s part of the manager role to be the starting point for people having better relationships at work.
2. In order to be in a meaningful relationship with someone, you have to spend time together.
Otherwise it’s that old story:
I remember when we broke up the first time / Saying, "This is it, I've had enough," 'cause like / We hadn't seen each other in a month / When you said you needed space! What?!
And we know how that pans out!1
So, meaningful relationships require time together. You want this to be a meaningful relationship, because that means that real things can be talked about. You want your managees to tell you the truth about how things are going.2 But we are more likely to tell the truth to people that we trust. So you need your managees to trust you. People will only trust you, and invest in the relationship with you, if they feel that you trust them, and are investing in the relationship too. So you must work to build their trust which cannot just happen ‘at a distance’.3
3. A good relationship has to work both ways. You need to invest in order to expect returns.
We do not value relationships with people who just take, take, take. We value relationships built on reciprocity. If you want to ask for something, you have to be prepared to give something back - or, even better, give something first. It is incumbent on you, the manager, to invest early and proactively. Be generous.
The thing of value to you is “performance management” and “strategic alignment” - asking people to change in ways that “serve the whole”. That’s the obvious bit of being a manager, and where most people’s associations with the role come from. What you can offer that’s of value to them is to support them as a person (“pastoral care”), to support them in their work (“learning and development”), and to ask the organisation to change in ways that serve their work better.
4. So: You need regular contact with your managees, and you need to be of value to them as a manager.
There are two ways to achieve these aims. One, is informally. That means being willing to be available as “pull support” to help people when they need you for a minute for advice or input. The other is formally. That means scheduling regular 121s, and then - even more importantly - actually having them.
Next week I will talk about exactly what a good 121 looks like.
PS: If you’ve found this post interesting or useful, please consider sharing with someone in your network who might also be interested.
If someone shared this post to you and you enjoyed it, please consider subscribing.
Thank you!
VS people being afraid of “talking back”.
Act like people are worthy of your trust, and they will be likely to act in a way that makes you trust them. This is the core belief of Theory Y. It is also a practical lesson from game theory: the most effective strategy in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma is start with generosity, and assume the other person will be generous too.