“… dragging down businesses, dragging down the economy … stymying the ability of public services to do what we need them to do.” Anthony Painter, the CMI’s director of policy

This is only going to get worse.

I know nothing about nuclear physics but could ask a research candidate to tell me what’s wrong with this equation.

E_b=(m_initial-m_final)*c 

A quick prompt in a well-known AI tool can make me look like an expert - on the face of it.

After that, I’m sunk. I know the equation as a fact (meaning that I can recite it), but don’t understand it.

I know WHAT the sequence of letters and numbers is, but not a clue about HOW to apply it. In fact, I don’t know what any of it stands for.

It is an example of surface knowledge. Yes, an extreme, but worth making.

This is one of the reasons why new managers are failing and dragging their organisation down. The quick fix does not work.

YouGov’s poll for the Chartered management Institute found that 82% of new managers in the UK are “accidental” and have little or no management training.

Why do so many think that you don’t need any decent training in this area?

This is the point. Anyone can do a search or input a prompt on ‘what to do as a leader or manager’. I have a list of actions for finding out the performance of a nuclear physics research department. But what I don’t have is the knowledge of the real team, the real people in order to ask the questions:

• in the right way
• for the right people
• at the right time.

I definitely will not have the understanding of how to react to the outcomes.

 

This is why organisations need professional help. Leadership and management training is an investment with huge ROI. The CMI’s work highlights this.

Ignore it and sink.

If you want to avoid sinking, get in touch.

 

The Guardian (23 Sep 2023). Heather Stewart. Bad management has prompted one in three UK workers to quit, survey finds.

Decision making is a fundamental part of all leadership levels. Pretty much everything I have read about it advises that time needs to be spent analysing data and interpreting outcomes. Falling back onto past actions is not always regarded as a good thing.

As Chris Griffiths points out in The Creative Thinking Handbook, the shortcuts that selective and reactive thinking provide will stifle innovation and hold back progress. There is plenty of evidence cited to support this. For example, Chris mentions Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman’s ‘Thinking, Fast and Slow’ (2011) that brings our “thinking faults, heuristics and bias” to light.

So I was intrigued by MITSloan’s recent article (06 Sep) ‘The Potency of Shortcuts in Decision-Making’. It points out interesting research that suggests CEOs who make quick decisions based on heuristics often make better decisions than those who take a more “comprehensive” approach.

On the face of it, this is good news for those who only rely on direct experience to make decisions -and there are plenty that do. As David McRaney states in ‘How Minds Change’, it takes less energy. David points out that psychologist Andy Luttrell suggests that it is “costly to keep re-evaluating everything all the time”. We can see the logic.

However, as always, context is important.

I’m sure many will agree that there are times when a decision must be made immediately, or at least in a short time period.

As the MIT article authors Kruse, Bendig and Brettle point out, relying on rule of thumb (as heuristics can be briefly defined) works best in noisy and dynamic situations and where “information is scarce”. And, I suggest, when you simply have to get on with it.

Early in the MIT piece it seems to suggest that because we are in times when we are data rich, it’s knowing “how much is enough” and then knowing what to do with it that is important. This supports the ideas that:

• heuristics can save time because it cuts down on the careful analysis of increasingly huge sets of data
• adding more information is not always going to help.

This puts heuristics in a favourable light. But as Kruse, Bendig and Brettle point out, there is a strong chance that bias can creep in. They also argue that it is pointless to take shortcuts when a lot of objective data is readily available. Indeed, this is where McRaney’s citing of Chaiken and Eagly’s Heuristic-Systematic Model fits in. 

It is at this point where the middle leader can offer support to senior colleagues who like to dive straight in.

In Saving Management From Our Obsession With Leadership*,  Jim Detert, Kevin Kniffin, and Hannes Leroy argue that leadership is far more 'romantic' than management. They cite data that shows there are a lot more leadership training products on offer than management ones. They refer to research that suggests it's "more flattering" being called a leader than a manager. And the evidence put forward makes it difficult to disagree.
However, it overlooks the reality of the leadership/ management world that a lot of us work in. In many organisations there is not a distinct set of managers and a separate one of leaders (except maybe financial managers).  At places within the hierarchy we have people in overall charge - regardless of their official leader or manager title. They oversee others and they are responsible for them. This role needs them to be leaders and managers simultaneously. Because of this they need to have well cultivated leadership and management skills. They need to know when to apply aspects of each of the skills sets in order to be more of a manger or more of a leader at the right time. This is the important point.
As the MIT Sloan article says, we have been carried away by the allure  of leadership. My concern is that this has happened to such a large extent that our management skills are being left under developed. The confusion over how we officially name managers and/ or leaders is not helping. If we have a job title that says 'leader' or we are officially part of a 'leadership team', does this diminish the importance of the management part of our work in our eyes?
For sure, a tricky part of writing the training for our Mastering Middle Leadership course was knowing when to call a component 'leadership' or 'management'. This was exactly the same when I was writing Middle Leadership for 21st Century Schools. If you have 'leadership' in the title but you are talking about actions that are significantly 'management', you need to be precise and differentiate it for the reader.
Perhaps someone could suggest a good (polite!) name for the person who is in this position .  I suppose you could use 'boss', but this sounds awkward. I can't remember hearing of anyone called a Middle Boss - just sounds weird. Maybe it's as simple as 'Head of ...'. But if you are head of marketing or head of mathematics and are in the Leadership Team... ? Enough.
It is a danger.
Jim, Kevin and Hannes point out how big-hitting-influencers like Elon Musk and Steve Jobs have dismissed managers as “paper-pushers, perpetuators of groupthink and symbols of organizational bloat". Is this subtly leading some of us to neglect the management tool kit we need to get into?
Yet as the article states, during Big Quit a lot of people resigned from jobs  because they were not clearly defined and structured - a failure to apply management  skills. This is about being in touch with day-to-day reality. It is about recognising the need to have clear protocols and systems that make the great ideas work. Research I did in 2010 *** found that even the most free thinking teams of creatives are more likely to be productive if checks and balances are in place. These management tools are enabling visionary leadership.
Knowing the difference between leadership and management is something we always try to sort out early in our Mastering Middle Leadership training.
That's all very well, but it is down to the individual person-in-charge to make sure their management skills don't get lost under a pile of leadership grandstanding. After all, a vision without structure is just another great idea that stays just that - an idea.
*   Jim Detert, Kevin Kniffin, and Hannes Leroy (2022) Saving Management From Our Obsession With Leadership. MIT Sloan Management         Review August 24
** Bill Lowe (2019) Middle Leadership for 21st Century Schools. Crown House.
*** Bill Lowe (2010) How to lead creative colleagues. Lessons from the creative industries. MiE. 24:2

We published these before the pandemic but they are worth reviewing. This is particularly important as we move (no matter how slowly) back to in-person training meetings

10 Tips for Training your Colleagues

 Training Tip 1:
When designing your training keep in mind that adults learn only if they need and want to - if learning’s can be linked to past, present and future experiences, if they can practice what they learned, if they have help and guidance and finally if they have an informal and non-threatening environment. – John Townsend (MTI Founder) Trainer’s Pocketbook
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  
 
 Training Tip 2:
When designing your training look for retention techniques that will allow your participants to retain and recall your key leanings.
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 3:
When designing your training remember we all have two sides of the brain and you need to stimulate participant’s to use both sides.  Do you know how to stimulate the Left and Right side?  Think VHF.
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 4:
When designing and preparing for your next training, think what could be your participant’s mindset and what could you to do overcome a “negative” or “judger mindset”.
What do you normally do when you are preparing yourself to train? What are the questions you ask yourself?
Are you using a model to design your training?
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 5:
Are you aware of the different Training Methods available to your training? When choosing evaluate them based on level of knowledge acquisition, attitude change, problem-solving skills, interpersonal skills, participant acceptance, knowledge retention. From J. Newstrom “Evaluating Effectiveness of Training Methods”
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 6:
We bet all trainers have their own “hakka”. Before going to a training at MTI we make sure we have our checklist, to make sure we have all our material and equipment on site. We try to arrive at least one hour in advance and when possible we prepare the room the night before, to avoid any last minute “issues”.  We mentally prepare by visualizing the group, we make sure we have a “learner mindset”, and believe all will work to perfection.
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 7:
When delivering training keep in mind that if you are not enthusiastic about your subject how can expect your participants to be!!! What do you do to communicate enthusiasm?
How do you decide which style (i.e. presenting, teaching, facilitating etc.) of training best suits your session? Are you aware there is a criteria and model that can help you decide?
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 8:
Get some feedback from colleagues on your delivery skills. How are you using your Voice, Eyes and Body Language to best engage your audience? If possible make a video of yourself. Write down what is the criteria that you will evaluate yourself against. What does 10 look like for you/your company/ your audience. Watch your video and define the gap. What are the actions you will take to improve and get to 10?
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 9:
If you are training at a different location make sure you try in advance all the equipment, visit the rooms, check the set up. Always plan for any eventualities. Bring your own laptop, back it up with a USB stick, have a DVD of the video you wish to show. Never, ever trust downloading a video during your training – 90% of the times it goes wrong.
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html  

 Training Tip 10:
Prepare, as much as possible. Rehearse your training. Test your exercise instructions. Once you do this before the training. You will be more relax and will definitely have fun.
Watch this space for more tips or you can learn and practice more on our Master Trainer Programme and other workshops: http://www.mastertrainer.ch/public-courses.html

​Question to  the Leadership MA group I was working with on Tuesday:
What examples of poor leadership have you experienced?

The most cited example:
The new leader that made immediate changes for no other reason than to ‘put their mark’ on the place.

I’ve been on the receiving end of this more than once.
It does not feel good because if you make immediate large scale changes as a new leader, you are saying:

“All that you’ve done before is rubbish”.
 
Yes, this is disrespectful and liable to rile your new colleagues who have worked hard under the previous leader. When they’ve bought into a way of doing things their former boss said was game-changing, it’s demoralising if you arrive and tell them it’s not - but your way is.
 
However, you might be right.

There could be employees who are saying:

“Thank goodness for that!”.

Maybe they’ve been waiting for a change to happen.

The best new leaders get a clear idea of the situation and what people think.
Obviously there could be things that need to be seen to quickly.


But don’t be in a rush to ‘make your mark’.

You only get one chance to make a first impression*. Don’t ruin it.
 
*Attributed to Oscar Wilde (and several others)

Bill Lowe 30 Sep 2022

This should raise more questions than answers.

Generalized solutions with sweeping statements won’t work here. Neither will a quote from a 'guru' who has written about leadership but not actually done it.
It’s not a “5 top ways to…” piece.

We need to think about the middle leaders’ part in Quiet Quitting. Yes. That new thing that has been around for as long as people have been employed. Its name doesn’t sit right with us either, but now isn’t the time to discuss that.
Commenters and contributors are writing a lot about what Quiet Quitting actually is. This is reasonably helpful but let’s not forget, we’ve always had the ‘minimal effort crew’.

We ask: is this the same?
I’ve spent hours reading about Quiet Quitting. As you would expect, there are different views. This is good, but it highlights the problem it poses for leadership at all levels. A LinkedIn thread responding to an Arianna Huffington post, has many shades of different opinions. There is a range of comments responding to this view:

 “Going above and beyond doesn’t have to mean allowing ourselves to be burned out. Pushing ourselves beyond the bare minimum is how we grow, evolve and expand our possibilities.”

Whilst a lot agree, the opposition is vocal. Posters point at “toxic bosses”, organisations that couldn’t care less about their workers conditions and that “Quiet Quitting is “unhuman”.
Others say that it is give and take, a two-way street and that knowing yourself is important.
The discussion can get deep. Away from LinkedIn: In the 29 August article for Business Insider, ‘Quiet quitting' is nothing but pro-boss propaganda, Ed Zitron reckons most of what is written about it is little more than ‘boss victimization’ when actually it is a simple act of workers doing something called ‘going to work’. He argues that it is not workers refusing to take their jobs seriously as is portrayed in a lot of current comments and articles, but more like propaganda to punish workers for not doing unpaid labour.


But perhaps the roots are here. In McKinsey Quarterly (Jan 2022) Aaron De Smet and Adria Horn suggest that employers are not sure why employees are “leaving in droves”.
This raises the question: Is the Great Resignation at the opposite end of the spectrum where the Great Quiet Quit starts?
The article goes on to suggest that we weren’t prepared for the trauma and disruption over the last two years. Good point. How can we set our expectations when we don’t know what the expectations are based on? Is this powering Quiet Quitting?

How do middle leaders fit into this? You can expect that every conflicting view and any shade of opinion can be had by your team members and your managers.
MTi CEO Richard Bradley can see the problem. “You get top managers who demand that certain targets are met but a lot of the time those expectations don’t match the provision they give.
The workforce is saying ‘We’re going flat out! We need help here’. This needs to be relayed to senior people. Good middle leaders can do this.”
Richard believes that a lot of organisations need a re-set. The work he has done to develop MTi’s Team Evaluation Review will help here. Where is your team? What are their expectations?

We know that effective middle leaders and managers are alert to quiet quitters. They are in a good position to uncover why they have taken on this stance and judge if their actions have a genuine cause. Are they skiving or are expectations outstripping realistic worker capacity?

Let’s make no mistake, attitudes are changing and a lot of us have new expectations - expectations of our managers and their expectations of us. Middle leaders need to be part of the two-way communication that helps this happen.
Organisational culture needs to be built around inviting and expecting middle manager input. That way, expectations will be better understood and Quiet Quitting not needed.


There's more to come on this.

​The Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) sent out an article recently* saying how ‘ownership mentality’ is needed to drive change and how it needs to be part of an organisation’s culture.
This has been understood for a long time. But from what I see, I can only assume that it must be easier said than done - because we come it very often. Why is it taking so long to get widely established?
Part of the answer is the focus of CCL’s research, not the findings. In particular, consider the people they surveyed. There is a lot of talk about discussions with VPs, directors and C-suite executives. If you want whole organisational buy-in of a vision, don’t place so much value on what those at the top of the hierarchy think. Get middle leaders involved. This will help embed the culture needed to make the vision work.
The usual comments about getting “commitment from everyone involved” and “clear communication” from leaders appear. This is accepted advice. But this in itself is a contradiction when considering the people whose opinion they seek. It supports the thinking that everyone needs to be involved, yet not everyone is surveyed. This is where middle leaders can drive performance. They need to be involved in surveys because they know the mood of the wider workforce.
The article cites these top level people recognising a disconnection between the current culture in an organisation and the “needed culture to implement the future-proof strategy”. Key question: Why is there a disconnect? Where is the break in communicating the vision? It must be somewhere in the middle.
An interesting section is where CCL Chief Research and Innovation Officer David Altman introduces the notion of ‘renters’ – who may be responsible for the gap, and ‘owners’ – who are fully aligned. This is valuable. I have a simplified take on it.
He describes ‘renters’ as employees who don’t feel they have a say in any decisions about the future. They don’t feel any sense of responsibility. I suggest that there are probably two reasons for this:

1. These employees are quite happy not having any say in things.  Or,
2. They haven’t been given the chance to contribute.

Permission and delegated authority need to given from higher up. It’s all very well criticising ‘renters’ but if they don’t feel their views are invited or accepted, they won’t bother.
 
‘Owners’ on the other hand, “take responsibility for their team and organization” and let everyone know they are committed to the cause.
The reasons for this?

1. They are keen to take on this responsibility.
2. They are allowed to and genuinely encouraged.

We think this is where middle leaders play a significant part. By their very nature, good middle leaders will be looking for chances to influence their organization’s culture. They know their team members and how to motivate them to become ‘owners’.
An effective middle leader will work at giving everyone the chance to contribute and then value the input. If they can see that certain team members aren’t fussed about it or would rather not bother, then they will tailor work around them. If they get complaints from self-identified ‘renters’, they can at least tell them that they were given the chance.
Time and effort can then be put to more effective use with employees who want to be part of the change. And make no mistake – time and effort will be needed. A good understanding of distributed and delegated leadership is required.
But above all, this will only work if middle leaders are given the permission and power to get it done properly. In order for this to happen, some middle leaders will have to ask for these tools. They aren’t always offered.
This is where ownership mentality works both ways. Middle leaders need to be owners of upward influence, especially if they are needed to change a culture and move the whole organisation forward.
Being part of culture change at middle leadership level is perfect preparation for senior leadership and that benefits everyone.
 
*original date 19 May 2020