Robin Hood Management
November 25, 2007
I’ve received a couple of emails asking for a bit of exposition on the concept of “Robin Hood Management” – I am always happy to oblige.
First, not every business’ culture will have the correct ingredients for a “Robin Hood Manager or Managers”. The ingredients for such an environment are these:
- An unofficial “schism” between the Upper Management and their professional and administrative staff;
- A “club” atmosphere with Upper Management appearing to make arbitrary decisions – some which seem punitive with no explanation;
- A high turn-over rate of people, both those poorly matched for the positions and those who are highly qualified but frustrated;
- A feeling that Upper Management “goes through the motions” of appearing open and encouraging honest feedback, when the general feeling is that the messenger is almost always punished, and it is better to keep your head down and go unnoticed even if it means doing things the hard way rather than the smart way.
Then along comes a middle manager who is charismatic, and who challenges the authority of the upper echelons. This manager goes to bat for the ”lower” levels. This manager listens to the team and acts in BOTH the best interest of the Company AND the best interest of the team.
Upper management reacts as though they feel threatened by this Manager, yet they are receiving the benefits of amazing productivity and results. The balance is very delicate, and upper management may choose to tolerate the “Robin Hood Manager” with only a few episodes of public chastisement, but eventually the Robin Hood Manager will be replaced by a more solicitous manager who knows his/her place in the heirarchy.
The staff will always love and remember their Robin Hood Manager, and may stay in contact with him/her long after they have separated from the Company. Looking back on the experience, Upper Management will fault a number of factors, but never acknowledge that they created the environment nor take any responsibility for their part in the little drama.
Many of these businesses will have a succession of Robin Hoods… all of whom are amazingly productive and help to move their companies forward. But for every step forward, they will often move a step backward in order to rid themselves of someone they perceive is causing them to lose face in front of their established employees.
And so the cycle goes, on and on, until someone assumes responsibility and changes the culture substantially enough.
Transitioning to Management
November 11, 2007
I had dinner with friends on Friday – wonderful people and their children. As we were unwinding on the patio we talked of many things. Our conversation came around to work, as it often does, and I asked my friend how she was doing in her new position. R is a first time manager. She is extremely talented in her field. And we chatted about the whole transition to management.
There is a lot of discussion, theory, books, guidelines etc about transitioning to management. Plenty of information available for people who are making the change from team member to team leader. What is not very ample – is information on how existing management can support that transition.
It is equally important for the existing management to provide strong examples of behaviors that are appropriate for reinforcing the authority and leadership of the new manager, as it is for that manager to establish the boundaries and structure of their own management style.
I have witnessed businesses who have left people meant to be leaders, floundering in an unclear role, expecting them to establish themselves as leaders “unofficially”. The obvious problem with this is – if they are not recognized as part of the leadership structure, then they are placed in a subversive leadership role.
It is not their intent to be subversive, but the message that the existing leadership sends is “you must choose who to follow” rather than “we are all heading for the same goal”. Even when the unofficial leader is heading for the same goal as the structured leadership – there is an air of “Robin Hood Management” going on.
This structure says: “We, the leaders, are above you. We tolerate the petty leadership of some of your peers as long as it pleases us, but at any time we might get rid of any of you because you are all peons.”
No one confronted with that will admit it. You can confirm it in the morale of the support staff and the non-leader professional staff. You can also confirm it in the turn-over of the staff. Mixed messages have done more to create turn-over than any other reason.
My friend, R, is blessed to have a supportive management team. A management team who has met with her subordinates to make clear her role, and her authority. She is an emplathic, thoughtful person. I know she will be a successful manager, with her talents and skills and the support of her management team.
We’ve ALWAYS done it this way…
November 9, 2007
It is a standing joke… and a standard defensive response. When presented with the possibility of change, humans retreat to routine. Whether it is a conscious decision or an unconsious one, we all do it. So how do you encourage and embrace change in your organization?
There are many consultants out there that claim they can help you and your organization “embrace change”. What is it that they are trying to accomplish? Are you and the consultant trying to impose chaos over structure? And if you are, what makes you think anyone would embrace that, given that human nature thrives on structure?
I say “structure” with purpose. Not necessarily “routine” but structure, framework, organization. It means that if you want people to process change effectively, it must be structured in a way that they can see what the results are supposed to look like. The need to see what the goal is for the change – to have a clear vision of where they are going and what it will look like, feel like, smell like….when they get there.
Great leaders all have the ability to share the vision of what the change will “lead” to – good leaders are at least able to convince their team that they know where they are going and elicit trust in themselves personally that gets everyone to the end goal. You probably have experience of good and not-so-good leaders. History demonstrates all kinds of leaders if you need some examples.
Think you have what it takes to be an agent of change? If you think you are able to structure change successfully – test yourself. Try getting a tired 3 year old to take a nap.
If you can do that – you probably have what it takes!
Gravity – it is just a theory
November 9, 2007
I hear a lot of theories in my line of work. Consultants hear them and propose them. It’s part of what we do.
They are not always called theories. Sometimes we call them strategies, sometimes they are called business plans. They amount to the same thing – they require a certain understanding of concepts that most people take for granted. Like the many scientific studies that report on subject matter that seems to be common sense, many theories in business seem to address ideas that should be self-evident.
“Customer Service” like “Gravity” is a theory that people do not concern themselves with unless they are confronted by an ugly situation involving their expectations about that theory. For example – when you hit turbulence while sitting in a plane that is 10,000 feet in the air – suddenly you are reviewing everything you ever knew about gravity and the way airflight finds a loophole in the whole theory of objects falling. Likewise, until a customer threatens to pull their business from you, Customer Service is simply taken for granted. And if that customer represents a large percentage of your revenue, you will find yourself in a freefall situation, wondering if the oxygen masks will be making an appearance anytime soon.
Before you get to the panic point, if you are a business owner or a department manager, set aside a time monthly to review those theories (or plans or strategies) that might need a plan B… just in case.
I don’t fly with a parachute available, but I do always know how many seats away the nearest exit is, so if the lights go out and I need to find the exit, I can count my way there. Likewise, if I am dependent on one client – I take pains to safeguard that relationship and to develop alternative business opportunities.
A Company is Known by the People it Keeps
November 1, 2007
I have been an alumnus of a number of small companies that are more known for the successes of the people who have left than those of the people that have stayed. Each of these companies have reputations for their high turn-over rate, and many rationalizations internally for why people leave… the bottom line is that they have no problem finding and choosing very capable and talented people. Their chief problem is in keeping those people.
To those companies, and you know who you are, I say “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results!”
Throwing new talent at a problem without examining the processes and circumstances that caused the old talent to leave, be fired, or check out in performance is a formula for repeating the same failures over and over again. If you are sincere in wanting to KEEP the people you have spent so much money to find, hire, and train – then you must be prepared to change something that has not yet changed.
It is an ego-issue 99% of the time and you know it in your heart of hearts. Someone who works for you may have even been brave enough to raise the issue with you… of course, that someone is now in the dog house or gone.
If you truly desire to break through to the “next” level of productivity and keep the wonderful talent you have toiled so hard to find – you must be able to change your most basic assumptions about yourself and your business. And be willing to trust the people you have working on your team!
Start by learning about yourself, your style, your vision… and then find out about your team, their individual and group styles, and their vision. Where there are disconnects, you have opportunities to create improvements! Where there are commonalities, you have opportunities for increased trust and performance.
Of course if you enjoy the cycle, continue on as you are – making superficial changes and getting the same results over and over. You can be the “Company that is known by the people it loses.”
