1.      pro-active management,

2.      re‑active management, and

3.      crisis management.

People with management responsibilities will each have their personal style of doing things.  In the same way, groups with management responsibilities will have a collective style.

It is important that managers and management groups know and understand their own management style – and that of the management group.   Best way to do this is for a manager to ask the people under her/his management!

Typical behaviours of a proactive management style:

This is the style of management where the possibility of problems or opportunities is examined, where the manager thinks ahead, initiates action and therefore takes the lead in preventing problems, creating possibilities and projecting the interests and needs of his/her staff and his/her areas of accountability and responsibility.

1. Open to new ideas
2. Trust among managers
3. Open flow of information
4. Support for people who show initiative
5. Humanistic attitude toward staff and customers/service-users
6. Clear and specific focus on staff and customer/service-user needs
7. Higher level of staff satisfaction
8. Participative and consultative decision making style
9. Entrepreneurial in acquiring resources
10. Careful coordination of new initiatives with existing commitments
11. Confident about keeping other managers – and their own staff – aware of priorities and plans

Typical behaviours of a re-active management style:

This is the style of management where decisions are made absolutely and only in response or reaction to a problem or opportunity – where no action is taken to prevent problems or create opportunities, and very rarely is anything planned or initiated by the manager.

1. Suspicious of new ideas
2. Competition among managers
3. Restricted flow of information
4. Suspicion of people who show initiative
5. Swings between humanistic and custodial attitudes towards staff and customers/service-users
6. General focus on staff and customer/service-user needs
7. Lower level of staff job satisfaction
8. Less participative and consultative decision-making style
9. Internal initiatives are direct reaction to available resources
10. Sees each initiative as separate – could be poor at coordination
11. Selectively informs other managers – and their own staff – of selected aspects of priorities and plans

Typical behaviours of a crisis management style:

This is the style of management where nothing new or different is considered unless and until a situation of crisis proportions is reached, where the status quo reigns and problems or opportunities are ignored or bypassed until a crisis is reached, emotions are exposed and war is declared!

1. Closed to new ideas
2. Distrust among managers
3. Only a privileged few have access to information
4. Intolerance of people who show initiative
5. Custodial attitude toward staff and customers/service-users
6. Focus on staff and customer/service-user needs only when convenient or forced
7. Lowest level of staff job satisfaction
8. Closed decision-making style
9. Status quo is the norm – unless there is no option
10. Each initiative is kept separate – does not encourage coordination, as this could present a challenge to authority
11. Only informs other managers – and their own staff – of selected aspects of priorities and plans when formally requested or forced to do so

Related posts

• No related posts.

Role clarity is a requirement and right for any person employed, contracted, sub-contracted or invited by the Management Group to perform tasks and undertake responsibilities as determined and endorsed by them.   Where job satisfaction is increased or enhanced, the quality of contribution and level of confidence are also increased or enhanced: where it is reduced, consistency in operational performance can also be reduced. 

Role clarity

Each person in your organisation should know what is expected as a result of their effort, skills and abilities, competencies and endeavour on behalf of the organisation.

Role clarity is a requirement and right for any person employed, contracted, sub-contracted or invited by the organisation (either paid or unpaid) to perform tasks and undertake responsibilities as determined and endorsed by the appropriate level within the organisation.

Key factors include:

1. position descriptions that adequately and clearly detail the nature and extent of authority, areas of accountability and specific responsibilities allocated to each position,

2. policies and procedures that cover the advertising, selection, appointment and orientation of paid and unpaid workers,

3. adequate and appropriate supervision and support for all personnel,

4. opportunities for professional development in order to acquire and maintain skills and qualities at levels necessary to achieve and maintain the organisation’s standards and requirements,

5. easy access on request to industrial and professional information, and to the responsibilities of the employer,

6. clear policies and procedures for the recruitment, placement, supervision and support of volunteers,

7. an adequate personnel records and salary system ensuring that all legislative and employer requirements are being met, and

8. a work environment conducive to the required level of performance and standard of quality.

Job satisfaction

The concept of job satisfaction is defined as the balance between meeting the ‘needs of the individual’ and the ‘demands of role in the organisation’

•  the needs of the individual includes being genuinely valued and respected, being able to make a valued contribution and receiving an appropriate reimbursement for effort, ability and skill in a safe and secure work environment.  Individual needs apply to both paid and unpaid positions.
•  the demands of the role in the organisation are expressed in the role description, in workplace policies and procedures, work practices, performance measures and organisational objectives

It is possible to enhance and increase each person’s job satisfaction in relation to:

• tasks, including procedures,
• working relationships, including teamwork, and
• actual work environment, including the physical work location and work station.

The key question to ask is whether an individual’s level of job satisfaction is gained or can be increased by accomplishing the task, working with other people or making sure that the environment is suitable and acceptable. 

It is important to realise that another person’s behaviour that seems without any value to you may well be a behaviour that is highly valued by that person: therefore you are wise to understand that another person’s behaviour is simply demonstrating their own values and offering you a point of entry into their thinking or for negotiation. 

Initially concentrating on organisational policies and procedures in my consultancies, I quickly realised that these can produce very few positive results unless human factors are taken into account.  If an organisation is able to understand and anticipate human behaviours, they are much closer to increasing:

• individual job satisfaction at governance, management and operations levels of activity,
• organisational efficiency and productivity – which means that available or accessible resources are wisely invested in service/product/component design, delivery and conformance, and
• confidence in capitalising on opportunities as they arise or are created. 

Where the level of job satisfaction is increased or enhanced, the quality of contribution and level of confidence are also increased or enhanced.  Where job satisfaction is reduced, morale and personal and professional credibility are also reduced.   Note that job satisfaction can only be measured by the individual concerned.

Where one component becomes increasingly demanding and upsets the balance, the worker (paid or unpaid) may reduce their organisational performance or their individual needs to a token level and gain their ‘satisfaction’ from the component that is not as demanding. 

Two examples:

• where the worker’s personal life becomes extremely demanding, their organisational performance may suffer and the worker needs care and nurturing to get them through a difficult time
• where the demands of the worker’s role are difficult to understand, accept or fulfil, the worker may turn to their private or non-work life for ‘satisfaction’ and just offer a minimum performance in the work-role. 

In either case, it is possible that the worker may experience increasing burn-out, which can lead to a high level of personal and organisational risk.

Related reading includes my book, The Left and Right Brain Business - available on this website at $16.50 GST and P&P included.

Related posts

• A Management Group Activity to assess the effectiveness of internal policy and procedure manuals (0)
• A Management Group Activity to assess the effectiveness of a statement of philosophy (0)

The purpose of this Group Activity is to determine whether a statement of philosophy exists, and if so, the effect and impact of the statement upon individual and organisational conduct, behaviour and performance.    Most importantly, the statement of philosophy should be examined as to:

• the desired individual and organisational effect and impact of the statement,
• likelihood of misunderstanding or misinterpretation,
• assessment of the current effect and impact, and
• scheduling of appropriate improvements.

1.            Pose this question to the Management Group: is the Group aware of the existence, effect and impact of a statement of philosophy?

 Discussion should follow along these lines:

• is there an existing statement of philosophy, and how is it displayed, communicated, applied and monitored throughout the organisation,
• is it likely that any individual within the organisation could misunderstand or misinterpret either the statement itself, or the value placed on the statement in the manner in which the organisation operates,
• what procedure has been followed for the development, acceptance, endorsement and implementation of the statement – and is it appropriate today,
• is the statement reflected in practical terms by the Group in decision-making and planning, and
• is the statement accessible, and used as valuable and important information in the  orientation of new staff.

 2.            From this discussion, the current importance and acceptance of the statement will become apparent. The opinions of the Group members should be noted as discussion continues.

 3.            Attention needs to be given now to the record of opinions.  Is there agreement that particular actions, including consultation, need to be taken to:

• establish a statement of philosophy in the event that none exists,
• review the existing statement to ensure it is suitable, acceptable and appropriately used and respected, and/or
• review and formalise the procedure for the development, acceptance, endorsement and implementation of the statement.

4.            Allocate responsibilities – and resources – for agreed actions, and agree on completion dates.

5.            Turn attention now to the practical use and application of the statement of philosophy, including:

a)      role clarity – is each individual and team confident of the expectations and requirements of the demands of their role in the organisation,

b)      role behaviour – is it possible for an individual or team to impose their own philosophy through misinterpretation or absence of an endorsed statement, and do we understand the level of risk if this occurs?

c)      individual job satisfaction – does the endorsed statement contribute in a practical manner to the level of individual job satisfaction among operational staff, and

d)      does the statement present an acceptable,  practical and positive basis for assessment of individual and organisational behaviour and performance.

Suggestions that may be useful for the Management Group in this activity:

 1.     Use and application of a social or theoretical model as a basis for the statement of philosophy.  such a model should consist of three levels:

• the purpose of the model,
• the components which together comprise the model, and
• the elements which comprise individual components – which is the level of practical application.

2.     Where a social or theoretical model is to be followed, be sure to use language and style that are:

• appropriate and relevant to the currently endorsed strategic priorities, financial limitations, and the agreed  stage within the organisation’s life-cycle (eg establishment, innovation, maintenance, evaluation/review),
• easy to understand, taking account of differences and diversity among operational staff,
• avoid misunderstanding or misinterpretation – whether accidental or intentional,
• can be applied and followed easily, with safety, and with positive effect and impact on operational activities, functions and responsibilities.

3.      Be assured that, where an organisational statement of philosophy does not exist or is not known or respected, individual philosophies will surface to fill the void: this can lead to confusion and distrust – with distortion of the Management Group’s expectations and requirements for individual and operational performance,  

 4.     The following extract from my book, The Left and Right Brain Business, is just one benefit from a statement of philosophy that is respected by the Management Group and operational staff:

• I have found that identifying and respecting the reasons for particular actions and re-actions contributes to resolving many of the problems inherent in employing staff, building teams, allocating responsibilities and achieving desired results.  It is most important to understand and predict human behaviour in a specific environment when creating effective business and workplace relationships – which means understanding:
  • how and why people think, feel and act differently,
  • how to recognise and manage ‘people’ problems,
  • how to create opportunities for yourself and others,
  • how to build organisational success through Business Brainpower, and
  • how to improve your business, workplace and personal relationship.

Related posts

• A Management Group Activity to assess the effectiveness of internal policy and procedure manuals (0)
• A Management Group Activity to address role clarity and job satisfaction (0)

The purpose of this group activity is to determine whether policy and procedure manuals exist, and if so, the care with which they are developed and applied.   Commercial and nonprofit organisations will benefit from developing statements of principles and objectives to guide all decision making in relation to functions which are repeated, and to ensure consistency in approach and value.  Most importantly, policies and procedures should always reflect the current philosophy and bottom-line. 

Policies and procedures may be kept in the same manual or in separate manuals.

 1.            Pose this question to the Management Group: is the Group aware of the value and importance of policies?

 Discussion should follow along these lines:

• what is the internal procedure for developing a new policy
• what is the internal procedure for changing an existing policy
• does a policy manual exist, containing copies of all policy decisions made  over (at least) the previous three years
• is the policy manual up-dated as new policies are made, or out-dated policies amended
• is the policy manual used as a major reference by the Group in decision-making and planning
• is the policy manual accessible, and used as valuable and important information in the  orientation of new staff

 2.            From this discussion, the current importance of internal policies will become apparent.   The opinions of the Group members should be noted as discussion continues.

 3.            Attention needs to be given now to the record of opinions.  Is there agreement that particular actions need to be taken to:

• establish a policy manual in the event that none exists,
• review the existing policy manual to ensure it contains all current policies, and/or
• review and formalise the procedure to develop, implement or evaluate policies?

4.            Allocate responsibilities – and resources – for agreed actions, and agree on completion dates.

5.            Turn attention now to procedures, eg to satisfactorily complete a task or carry out a responsibility to the required standard.  

Procedures should:

• apply equally to functions which are repeated (ie where policies are appropriate) and to those which are ‘one-off’, and
• provide instruction and guidance, thus ensuring a basis for measuring quality in performance

 6.          Pose this question to the Management Group:  is there a clear understanding of the link between policies and procedures?

• a policy is written for a function carried out frequently within the organisation, and each policy requires a written procedure to ensure it is implemented according to internal requirements
• a procedure is written for functions covered by a policy, as well as for one-off functions or activities for which a policy is not required

 Discussion should follow along these lines:

a)    is there a clear understanding of the responsibilities associated with any procedure, such as:

• what needs to be done, in sequence from start to finish
• why it needs to be done
• how it needs to be done, and to what standards
• how often it needs to be done
• who is accountable, and to whom, for the satisfactory completion of the procedure
• who is responsible for each stage of the procedure
• who else is involved in each stage
• what is the time-frame for the total procedure
• where do the various stages take place
• what resources or facilities are required to satisfactorily complete the total procedure
• how will progress be monitored
• how will the total procedure be evaluated

b)    is this sequence already in place, and who is responsible for writing procedures and monitoring their implementation:  if there is no sequence currently in place, what is the best way of introducing such a sequence

c)    does a procedures manual exist, containing copies of all formal internal procedures to be followed

d)    is the procedures manual up-dated as new procedures are developed or out-dated procedures amended

e)    is the procedures manual used as a reference manual to monitor quality and standards within the organisation

f)    is the procedures manual accessible, and used as valuable and important information in the orientation of new staff

7.            From this discussion, the current importance of internal procedures will become apparent. The opinions of Group members should be noted as discussion continues.

8.            At the conclusion of discussion firstly on policies, and secondly on procedures, agreement is needed to:

• establish relevant manual/s if neither exist,
• review existing manual/s to ensure all current policies and procedures are included, and/or
• review and formalise a consistent procedure for developing, introducing and evaluating policies and procedures.

Related posts

• A Management Group Activity to address role clarity and job satisfaction (0)
• A Management Group Activity to assess the effectiveness of a statement of philosophy (0)

The first requirement in quality assurance and improvement is the presence of a quality system.  With a quality system in place, quality assurance is possible: and the outcome of quality assurance is continuous quality improvement. 

Quality is the degree or standard of excellence, especially a high standard:   the totality of the attributes of a service or product that meets the requirements of the user of the service or owner of the product.

A Quality system is a series of actions designed to ensure consistency in approach, process and output.

A basic quality system is Total Quality Management (TQM), defined as the extent to which your organisation meets, or exceeds, stakeholder expectations and requirements.

TQM is defined as:

• the extent to which your organisation is able to identify stakeholder needs and expectations – quality of research
• the extent to which the total unit design of your organisation’s programs and services meets or exceeds stakeholder expectations – quality of design
• the extent to which your organisation is able to provide and continue to perform, function and operate as intended – quality of conformance

Quality control is the internal method of avoiding a deviation from the desired or required situation, or the method of altering or changing the situation to achieve the desired or required situation.   A key factor in any system is ‘control’, and there are two sorts of control:

1. the maintenance of an existing situation, bringing it back to normal when it deviates, and
2. the introduction of change into a situation, whether by making alterations to the existing situation or by creating a new situation

Quality assurance is the result of quality control, in that there is certainty as to consistency in approach, process and output through the quality system.  This includes ensuring that all repetitive functions or activities are consistently performed or carried out to the same desired or required standard.  An audit or assessment process is the usual means of check quality assurance.

Continuous quality improvement indicates an active commitment throughout the organisation to improving – rather than simply maintaining – the desired or required degree or standard of excellence.  The 3 basic stages are:

• increasing your organisation’s knowledge and understanding of stakeholder expectations and requirements
•  improving the design, so that the mix of features afforded by your organisation’s programs and services more closely match stakeholder expectations and requirements, and
•  improving your organisation’s ability to consistently perform, function and operate more closely to the design.

The outcome of a quality system is that the organisation has a sound basis for applying the basic philosophy of quality assurance, a clear set of guidelines for quality systems and processes, a means of satisfying contractual obligations, and readily available guidance and direction.

How do ‘quality’ and ‘risk’ relate to each other?

The basis of quality is that there are procedures and systems in place to ensure:

• consistent and replicable standards
•  consistency and replicability of improved standards
•  assessment and resourcing of identified risk factors, and
•  avoidance or management of risk.

A risk factor is present where there is likelihood that a product or component will have to be:

• re-worked – requiring further attention and therefore involving further cost and inconvenience, or
•  replaced – resulting in loss, wastage or inconvenience.

 A risk factor is present where there is a likelihood that a service or program will be:

• ineffective – unable to achieve the purpose for which it has been designed
•  inefficient – result in or contribute to an unwise use of resources, or
•  sub-standard – failing to meet or comply with advertised or required quality or standard of delivery, process or outcome. 

 Factors that can contribute to risk – and should be subject to quality control:

1. unwise, unexplained, unnecessary or unplanned change
2. disagreement, misinterpretation or misbehaviour among or between stakeholders
3. failure or delay in communication or information dissemination
4. inadequate, inappropriate, incorrect or vague information or instruction
5. non-availability of relevant information, plant, equipment, materials, facilities, tools
6. failure to protect the needs and interests of the organisation and the separate and particular requirements or expectations of each stakeholder
7. failure to comply with legal, statutory or contractual requirements, duties or obligations
8. unacceptable behaviour on the part of decision-makers – including conflict of interest, lack of confidentiality or unwise use of information
9. lack of appreciation or understanding of immediate, short-term and long-term constraints relating to such factors as finance, time, space, distance, technology and available resources
10. inexperience, undue haste, emotional stress, internal or external pressures, inadequate resources, unwise decisions, insufficient care, bad timing or bad luck
11. inadequate or inappropriate processes and procedures for:

• needs analysis
• task and territory management
• service/product/program/component design, costing, budgeting, scheduling, implementation, management and evaluation

Four Critical tools in risk management

 Decision-making

A consistent decision-making process and style, particularly in relation to the assessment of options and implications: the issues of risk avoidance, risk management and quality control are dependent on consultative yet incisive decision-making

Policy-making

A policy on policy-making to ensure that all policies and procedures are designed, discussed, endorsed, resourced, communicated, implemented and evaluated in a consistent manner

 Business practices – ensuring that the following basic business practices are in place throughout the organisation:

1. strategic and business plans
2. budget estimates
3. cashflow projections
4. financial controls
5. key performance indicators, measures and assessment
6. risk avoidance/management procedures, and
7. quality assessment and continuous improvement procedures.

Quality Assurance

Total commitment to the value of an organisation-wide system and procedure to ensure and sustain a consistent and replicable quality of product, component, service, or program, with efficient and effective procedures in place to either avoid or manage risk

Related posts

• Jean’s definition Difference between Management and Leadership (0)
• Chapter 1: Riding the Waves of Community Development in Australia (1)
• Understanding the relationship between Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Creativity (0)
• Time and Task Management (0)
• Supervision and Delegation (0)

This article features my responses to three of the issues raised and discussed in working with small and medium business owner/managers – who need to use their knowledge, skills, observations and experience in guiding the development of their business.    These issues all apply to the day-to-day application of the difference – and relationship – between ‘Management’, ‘Leadership’, ‘Innovation’ and ‘Entrepreneurship’.

 1.    Statements/quotes presented or quoted to owner/managers as sound business wisdom    

These are statements/quotes that appear in business articles, advertisements, 30-second grabs, busy business books, power-point presentations or rapid-fire conversations.  Similarly, they appear in lengthy newspaper and journal articles written in general terms, for a broad audience.   Whether intended or not, these tend to display the speaker’s or author’s knowledge, experience or background rather than offer something of practical value for the owner/manager as listener or reader. 

Such statements/quotes lack what I call a ‘therefore’ suggestion.  

For information or knowledge to be useful, it needs to be followed immediately by ‘therefore, here’s something you can try or do to test or apply this information or knowledge, and aim for an immediate practical benefit’. 

If there is no ‘therefore’ suggestion, owner/managers can experience confusion.  Are they supposed to already know what it means, or what to try or do, or what not to do?  If they don’t know, does this mean they aren’t as responsible or successful as they had thought?  No!  It simply means that they don’t – and probably can’t – find the statement/quote useful.  Hence there’s no or little impact from the speaker or author, and more importantly, no or little benefit for the owner/manager.

My response to you as an owner/manager in this first issue is always to look for the ‘therefore’ statement.  If it’s not there, disregard the statement or quote if you are looking for an immediate practical benefit.  Certainly don’t sense a deficiency on your part! 

2.    Categorizing people according to their ‘generation’

The assumption in this issue is that a person’s birth date will be sufficient for an owner/manager as employer to safely predict the person’s values, work style, aspirations, etc.

There are speakers and writers who consistently and repeatedly apply this assumption to a variety of situations, problems or themes as though it is a universal truth – often with humour, but always as truth.  Owner/managers as employers can do themselves and their staff a disservice if they accept this assumption and apply it as a truth.

My 2008 book One Man Show – the smallest of small business features The Generational Factor (on page 38) addresses this issue.  Joseph Mayo, an early writer about personal values, claimed that our values are established by the age of seven years.  He went on to suggest that to begin to understand any person, think about where they might have been living up to the age of seven – and then think about what was going on around them locally, socially, economically, culturally, nationally and globally during those seven years.  You will then have a fair idea of their personal values that influence attitudes and behaviours.

Mayo Clinic Health Information, accessible on their website, offers an article Workplace generation gap: understanding differences among colleagues (Mayo Clinic Staff, July 6^th 2005).  This article states that ‘people of today’s workplace generations possess characteristics that derive, in large part, from the political social and economic climate of their youth’.  

The article explains anticipated behaviours of each of four generations – ranging from pre World War 2 through to 2005, and offer suggestions on how to work with our own and other generations, together with this caution:  ‘Be wary of stereotyping: not all traits apply to all members of a generation’

Advice from the Mayo Clinic Staff is to:  ‘Be aware of the differences, appreciate the strengths, and manage the differences effectively.’

Additionally, my 1997 book The Left and Right Brain Business examines the many ways in which people in a workplace act or react in a variety of roles, structures, workplace relationships and circumstances.  A workplace relationship exists when two or more people choose – or are required – to work collaboratively for a specific purpose.  They may work as individuals or teams.  The starting point is to identify a workplace relationship, and the basic components by which the owner/manager as employer can:

• establish and maintain positive workplace relationships, or
• recognise and improve not-so-positive workplace relationships.

My response to you as owner/manager in this second issue is to look for the uniqueness in every individual – because it is there.  You can take generations, workplace relationships, levels of skill and knowledge, range of experience, etc., into account when seeking and acknowledging each person’s uniqueness.  Then, when you have identified it, capitalise on and challenge the uniqueness.  You will find what I call ‘star quality’: additionally, acknowledge and protect your own uniqueness.

3.    Being told to ‘work on your business, not in it’. 

The assumption in this issue is that reference to ‘your business’ includes and covers everything you do as an owner/manager.  But not so!  There is one part of your business that you need to ‘work on’ and another part of your business that you need to ‘work in’.  There is the ‘art’ – and there is the ‘science’ – of your business.

‘Art’ is the doing of a thing.  It is necessary to conceptualise the process of deciding what you are doing – or intend to do – and how.   This requires a separation of (a) the way you operate as a business, from (b) the product or service you offer through your business.  You will need to separate and conceptualise both.    It is most likely that your way of doing business, ie your business operation, will be determined by your personality, circumstances, knowledge, confidence, strengths, abilities or comfort zone.   It is most likely that the product or service you offer through your business will be something that you enjoy, that you either know exceedingly well or are inspired to know exceedingly well, and/or that satisfies your creative urge. 

Science is the understanding of a thing.  It is necessary to understand and appreciate the practical implications of (a) the way you operate as a business, as well as (b) your product or service.  If you understand your business, you will be able to plan improvements or expansion, acquire additional resources, maintain or expand your core business, introduce appropriate technology and systems, etc.  Most importantly, you will be able to determine how you will monitor and measure progress.

My response to you as owner/manager in this third issue is to emphasise the difference and relationship between the art and science of your business.  As owner/manager, you are at the heart of your business – and this means acknowledging and accepting:

a)    your critical role in the life of your business, and

b)    your expertness in the way you operate as a business as well as the product or service you offer through your business.

Sure, you may wish to seek advice, read newspapers and journals, and use a variety of tools to understand the people who are involved with or affected by your business.  But be sure that you know – and understand – your business thoroughly.  Look for the ‘therefore‘ statements, find the uniqueness in others and yourself, and revel in the art (ie the doing) and the science (ie the understanding) of your business.

Yes, you are owner/manager – but more importantly, know and accept yourself as a manager, as a leader, as an innovator, and as an entrepreneur.

This June series has the theme of the difference and relationship between management and leadership in the journey to innovation and entrepreneurship.  The next article in this weekly series will address the critical issues of Risk and Quality along this journey.

Related posts

• Summary of Jean’s address – VU Entrepreneurs Business Network Breakfast, 26th May (1)
• Jean’s Tool No. 4 – Decision Tool (1)
• Understanding the relationship between Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Creativity (0)
• One Man Show – the smallest of small business – extract from Section 4: Traffic lights for One Man Show business start-ups. (0)
• One Man Show – the smallest of small business (9)

The difference – and relationship – between ‘Management’ and ‘Leadership’, and their link with ‘Innovation’ and ‘Entrepreneurship’

Managers are involved with what, how, when, how much, at what cost, and with what benefit/return.  Management styles can be crisis, re-active and/or pro-active. 

• Jean’s article Management styles – pro-active, re-active and crisis can be downloaded free of charge from her website, www.jeanroberts.com.au 
• Jean’s 2008 Governance Kit No. 3 Personal responsibilities of nonprofit Board Members - including code of conduct, conflict of interest, confidentiality, and loyalty to the organisation’s purpose presents a Section on ‘Board Style’, recognizing these three management styles in the manner in which Committee and Boards undertake their governance role and function.

Leaders are involved with who, who with, who else, who best.  There are a variety of leadership styles, and my preferred model is The Situational Leader, by Dr Paul Hersey, Center for Leadership Studies – published by Warner Books in 1984.   In his Foreword, J. William Pfeiffer, Ph.D., J.D., President, University Associates Inc, San Diego, California, states:

• What has long been needed is a system for managing people that is both conceptual and practical.  An easy-to-grasp system with a scope that is broad enough to permit its application to a wide range of situations is essential.  Such a model would promote a precise language in which managers could both understand and act upon the problems they experience in managing their people.  This new approach must build on the existing language of management so that learning it and using it are easily mastered.  Furthermore, this model must have face validity that allows it to be accepted and implemented from the executive suite to the first level of supervision.  The Situational Leadership model, developed by Dr Paul Hersey and his colleagues at the Center for leadership Studies, meets these criteria. 

Innovators are involved with what else, how different, why this, why now, why us.  Innovation styles can include conceptual, logical, technical, inspirational, and/or back-to-the-wall, ie desperation or survival! 

Innovators use the power of thought.  Think of the many thousands of thoughts that come into your mind each day- most of which simply pass on into your subconscious or out into the ether. Thoughts can flow from many sources, including events, observations, conversations, dreams, reading or experiences.   The thoughts that connect with your emotions are those you will keep in your conscious mind to work with in some way. The connecting emotion can be positive, negative, or somewhere in between.

The essential ingredient for creativity is the connection between thought and emotion. There is no more powerful force than this. You can become excited, angry, concerned, interested, confused, desperate, traumatised, fulfilled, exhilarated in an instant response to a thought – what you are experiencing is the triggering of a creative response

Entrepreneurs are involved with management, leadership and innovation.   In their book The Innovation Formula – how organisations turn change into opportunity,  published in 1988 by Ballinger Publishing Company, Michael Robert and Alan Weiss state that entrepreneurs are often viewed as ‘business swashbucklers who catapult new ideas into public prominence while they storm the walls of the establishment’.   However with the benefit and wisdom of 20 years of research, these authors present a very different picture with their descriptive yet prescriptive statement that they found ‘true entrepreneurs aren’t pirates, but disciplined sailors who anticipate the winds and tides of change’.

Disciplined sailors actively demonstrate the qualities of a manager, leader and innovator in demonstrating entrepreneurship.

Jean’s article Understanding the relationship between Entrepreneurship, Creativity and Innovation can be downloaded free of charge from this website.

We know that ‘Management’, ‘Leadership’, ‘Innovation’ and ‘Entrepreneurship’ can be studied separately.  However, in the day-to-day practical challenges associated with any business, they are very closely related – and sometimes so closely related that they are difficult to separate.  

 Jean’s hand-out notes at the Breakfast Meeting are added here:

 The difference – and relationship – between ‘Management’ and ‘Leadership’

 Managers are expected to achieve agreed objectives with and through people, requiring confidence and skill in:

1. time and task management,
2. trialing and refining of ideas,
3. delegating the right tasks to the right people at the right time in the right way,
4. acquiring and allocating adequate, available and appropriate resources,
5. developing clear policies, procedures and work practices that contribute to continuous quality improvement,
6. performance management and monitoring,
7. effective and efficient support, systems and methods, including technology,
8. ensuring clear and open communication, and
9. negotiating on behalf of her/his areas of responsibility.

 ‘Management’ is a combination of:

1. ensuring job satisfaction for the manager’s staff, and
2. meeting the demands of their own role – and those of their staff – in the organisation.

Leaders are expected to demonstrate the ability to inspire others to work together as a team, following her/his lead in order to attain a common objective, involving:

1. interpersonal skills, including listening, questioning, observing, communicating,
2. willingness to learn as well as lead,
3. ability to relate effectively to a variety of behaviours, personalities, contexts and constraints,
4. commitment to building and maintaining relationships,
5. understanding the willingness, ability and commitment of ‘followers’ (you cannot be a leader if others are not prepared or willing to follow your lead), and
6. acceptance of limitations.

‘Leadership’ is a combination of:

1. productivity, and
2. innovation.

The one person can be Manager, Leader – and Innovator:

A common myth about innovation is that innovation is only about new or different ‘things’.   Innovation can also be about improving, changing – or even doing away with – existing ‘things’.

Innovation is a combination of ‘Management’ and ‘Leadership’

Related posts

• Owner/Managers as Managers, Leaders, Innovators and Entrepreneurs (0)
• Jean’s Tool No. 4 – Decision Tool (1)
• Understanding the relationship between Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Creativity (0)
• One Man Show – the smallest of small business (9)
• Non-profit sector assignments (0)

The definition of management used consistently in Jean’s writing is ‘achieving agreed objectives with and through people’.

Management style is the term given to the manner in which a manager or management group carries out the role of managing, ie the attitudes, values and behaviour which underlie decisions and actions associated with achieving agreed objectives with and through people.

It could be said that the management style is the ‘art’ of management.

People with management responsibilities will each have their personal style of doing things. In the same way, groups with management responsibilities will have a collective style. It is important that managers and management groups know and understand their management style, and accept that their style may not be consistent – for a range of valid  reasons.  The challenge is to be able – and willing – to adopt the style best suited to the immediate task of achieving an agreed and specific objective with and through a defined group of people.

There are three broad management styles:

1.       crisis management,

2.       re‑active management, and

3.       pro‑active management

1.         What is Crisis Management?

It is the style of management where nothing new or different is considered unless and until a situation of crisis proportions is reached, where the status quo reigns and problems or opportunities are ignored or bypassed until a crisis is reached, emotions are exposed and war is declared!

For example – a senior staff member has been asking for a position description since starting in the job six months ago.   Her manager has noted these requests, but taken no action. Complaints have been received indicating that ‘she has not been doing what he is employed to do’. These too have been noted but still no action taken by the manager.

The senior staff member has now accused her critics of back‑stabbing, given notice, and publicly criticised her manager.

The manager now decides he had better prepare a position description.   He also has a crisis of major proportion on his hands!

2.         What is Re‑active Management?

It is the style of management where decisions are made absolutely and only in response or reaction to a problem or opportunity – where no action is taken to prevent problems or create opportunities, and very rarely is anything planned or initiated by the manager.

Continuing the example, the manager would step in to prepare the position description a little earlier than the crisis manager – probably when the complaints had been received.

3.         What is Pro‑active Management?

It is the style of management where the possibility of problems or opportunities is examined, where the manager thinks ahead, initiates action and therefore takes the lead in preventing problems, creating possibilities and projecting the interests and needs of his staff and his areas of responsibility.

Continuing the example – this manager would have had a position description prepared before advertising the position: the position description would have been the basis for interviews and for negotiations with the preferred  applicant.

Comparison of these three management styles – starting with the pro‑active management style and working back to crisis management style -

–      a pro‑active manager is committed to a healthy body (ie the manager’s areas of responsibility, and the people through whom he is expected and required to achieve agreed objectives).  This includes taking great care with delegations, building trust and openness, and initiating a health care regime which ensures job satisfaction for the manager’s staff, positive working relationships with his peers, and significant benefits for the company or organisation as a whole.

• the pro-active management style is committed to maintaining a healthy body.

 –      A re‑active manager is committed to ‘band‑aiding’, recognises wounds (eg mistakes in records, unwise decisions, faulty communication, unclear expectations of staff) after they are inflicted (often self‑inflicted), sometimes cleans the wound, and applies the band‑aid – then another as that one drops off! This management style reacts to each problem or opportunity when it is no longer possible to ignore it. In short, this manager buys band‑aids in bulk, and has no planned health care regime.

• the re-active management style wishes desperately that it had a healthy body.

–      A crisis manager is into surgery! An event or incident is traumatic, affecting the whole body:  anaesthetic is applied for each crisis and all else becomes stagnant while a crisis is handled.

The wound is opened up to reveal inept behaviours, lack of forethought, and reluctance in accepting responsibility.  Heavy bleeding occurs, causing loss of energy, activity and confidence - with body parts being repaired or removed (accompanied by project failures or resignations). Suturing is completed and, if the manager is lucky, a healing process is allowed.

• The crisis manager thinks that repeated surgery creates a healthy body.

Any manager will be able to identify with one or more of these three management styles, either through their own experience or by observation.  It is possible that a manager could be using each of the three at the same time! For instance, adopting a re‑active style in decision-making, a pro‑active style in supervising staff, and a crisis management style in addressing tensions among the people through whom agreed objectives are expected to be achieved.

The next article in this weekly series will be a summary of my address at the Victoria University’s Business Entrepreneurs Network Breakfast on 26th May 2010.

Related posts

• Non-profit sector assignments (0)
• Non-profit (0)
• Jean’s definition Joint Ventures between Non-profit and For-profit Organisations – often spoken of in terms of ‘partnership agreements’ (0)
• Governance Kit No.1: clarifying the roles and responsibilities of nonprofit Board Members (0)
• Conferences (0)

All organisations operate as two equally important structures at one and the same time:

• the formal structure, and
• the informal structure.

Peace is more likely to reign where these two structures are treated with equal value and respect. 

War – or the threat of war – is more likely to be declared where either one is used to belittle or undervalue the other.

So – what’s the difference between the formal and informal structures – and how can they be used as tools of war or peace?

A:        The formal structure

The formal structure indicates the way things should happen – and are expected to happen – to support and strengthen the purpose for which the organisation exists.  It is a written and agreed structure that demonstrates:

1. the nature and extent of authority delegated throughout the organisation,
2. who is accountable to whom and for what,
3. how decisions are made, communicated, implemented and evaluated, and
4. how information moves through the organisation.

Examples of factors which need to be in place to influence the effectiveness of a formal structure:

1. agreed strategic priorities for the use or application of available or accessible resources,
2. policies and procedures for functions or activities that happen frequently,
3. position descriptions for each formal position,
4. systems in place to guide/ensure consistency in response to legislative, statutory and contractual duties, requirements and obligations, and
5. each person or group knowing and understanding the role and responsibilities of each other person or group within the formal structure.

A formal structure that genuinely reflects your organisation’s desired method of management and operation should be published and explained for all to see.  Then it becomes tool for peace.

A wise manager will use and display these management skills to deter war-like behavior through the formal structure:

1. adequate time allocated to planning, implementation and evaluation,
2. trialing and refining of ideas,
3. delegating the right tasks to the right people at the right time in the right way,
4. adequate, available and appropriate resources,
5. clear policies, procedures and work practices that contribute to continuous quality improvement,
6. adequate and appropriate financial and administrative systems, tools and competencies,
7. clear and open communication, and
8. negotiation and supervision.

Management is a combination of ensuring job satisfaction for staff, and meeting organisational demands.

B:        The informal structure

The informal structure, however, shows why things do – rather than should – happen.  It can change for better or worse without warning.  It may or may not have anything to do with the purpose for which the organisation exists – but will certainly impact on the effectiveness of the organisation.  Wise managers will monitor the informal structure closely and regularly, and show as much respect for it as they do the formal structure.

Examples of factors which influence the continually evolving informal structure:

1. personalities and friendships – within the workplace and externally,
2. sudden or lingering dislikes or disputes,
3. work-place relationships – particularly between people at different levels of authority
4. differing personal values, cultures or backgrounds
5. closeness or distance of people’s homes to each other, or to the workplace,
6. people travelling together to meetings or work-related activities
7. people mixing socially away from work,
8. family connections,
9. similarity or dissimilarity of education, qualifications or experience,
10. degrees of familiarity with or confidence in the formal structure, or
11. internal competition for scarce resources.

Regardless of whether there is an obvious and agreed formal structure in place, there will always be an informal structure – and this is where structure can become a tool of war.   People are left with their own interpretation of ‘what’s happening and not happening’ in order to interpret what is acceptable: the this can change according to who is interpreting.

Without a written and agreed formal structure, rules are not only unclear, they can be too easily revoked.  A procedure cited one day can be disowned the next due to a change in circumstance, a swing of unexpected support, new information, etc. 

A wise manager will display these leadership skills to deter war-like behavior through the informal structure:

1. interpersonal skills, including listening, questioning, observing, communicating
2. willingness to learn as well as lead,
3. ability to relate effectively to a variety of behaviours, personalities, contexts and constraints,
4. commitment to building and maintaining relationships,
5. understanding the willingness, ability and commitment of ‘followers’ (you cannot be a leader if others are not prepared or willing to follow your lead), and
6. acceptance of limitations.

Leadership is a combination of productivity and innovation.

Related posts

• Summary of Jean’s address – VU Entrepreneurs Business Network Breakfast, 26th May (1)
• Management and Leadership: Risk and Quality are two sides of the one coin (1)
• Jean’s Tool No. 1 – Information (0)
• Jean’s definition Difference between Management and Leadership (0)

Managers make decisions.  Sounds easy, doesn’t it? Some decisions are made by the Manager alone; others by the Manager in consultation with her/his team; and yet others by the team within their individual or group delegated authority.

However, the process of making a decision can be a ready-made tool in maintaining peace, dealing with the possibility or reality of war – or a ready-made weapon in declaring, waging and winning war!

And then, implementation of a decision can be a different challenge.  One or more team members may feel uncomfortable or threatened, the Manager may see the decision as undermining his/her authority or status, all may know that implementation will not be welcomed by others in their organisation or company, or insufficient attention to the work involved in implementation is given by one or more of the team – or the Manager her/himself.

A tool is a resource, able to be used, applied or adapted to attempt or achieve a pre-determined impact, result or outcome.   It is the manner in which tools are understood and applied which determine war or peace!  Funnily enough, the tools are the same for war as they are for peace.

Remember that internal warfare at worst destroys and at best renders the management role and function – and sometimes the manager – ineffective.

References are given throughout this checklist to Jean’s Definitions and Jean Roberts Update – freely available on this website.

1. What is a decision?

a)    the selection, or process of selection, of a course of action from a range of possible alternatives

b)    read Jean’s Definition of Assume: you’ll find this under Definitions on this website

2. What does a decision look like?

a)    decisions are a common factor in any workplace, and come in seven distinct flavours:

. routine

. non-routine

. contentious

. non-contentious

. urgent

. important

. unnecessary

b)    read Jean’s Definition – what’s the difference between management and leadership: you’ll find this

under Definitions on this website

3. How does a Manager assess the value of a decision?

a)    decisions should be in line with the strategic and policy framework of the organisation – and the Manager’s area of responsibility and sphere of influence

b)    always examine the workplace implications of a financial decision – and the financial implications of a workplace decision

c)    when a decision is made, record the decision and immediately initiate an action plan:

• what is the desired or intended result, and what are the steps necessary to do so
• who does what, and in what order
• what is the timeframe for completion
• what is the likely – or maximum – cost
• how is progress to be monitored and reported

d)    read Jean’s Definition of Effective Communication: you’ll find this under Definitions on this website

A decision-making procedure is a series of sequential steps which ensure a consistent approach to decision-making, including:

• identification and diagnosis of a situation, difficulty or opportunity
• reflective development of a plan to relieve or remove the difficulty, or to capitalise on the opportunity
• implementation of the plan’s success or otherwise.
• read Jean Roberts Update, November/December 2009, with articles on both risk and innovation – you’ll find this under Jean Roberts Update on this website

The process of decision-making is the manner in which the procedure is followed to ensure a consistent quality of decisions.

Decision-making is one of the most important and consistent functions of a Board. As can be seen from the sequential steps, the procedure for making a decision clearly falls into three distinct activities which can be broken down further into seven stages.

Critical Success Factors in decision-making are:

1              a clearly stated style and process of decision-making

2              strategies and procedures in place to ensure consistency in decision-making

3              access to the decision-making process for all who have either an interest in, or could be affected

by, the process or the outcome of a decision

4              a record of all major decisions, which must also be recorded/documented

5              decision-making process and procedures that reflect the structure (ie delegation of authority and lines of

accountability) and philosophy of the organisation

6               read Jean Roberts Update, January/February 2010, with articles on The Art and Science of

Monitoring – you’ll find this under Jean Roberts Update on this website

The 7-stage decision-making model

Stage 1         Analyse the situation, difficulty or opportunity

Stage 2         Define and agree upon the situation, difficulty or opportunity

Stage 3         Examine alternatives for action

Stage 4         Explore implications of each alternative

Stage 5         Select the alternative to be acted upon

Stage 6         Implement the selected action

Stage 7         Review and evaluate the process and the decision

8 key questions to use in designing an implementation plan at Stage 6

As a basis for designing the implementation plan, the following questions are based around the eight key questions…  what, why, how, who, who for, when, where, and at what cost

Not every decision will need to be worked through to this degree of detail, as there will be many decisions made on the basis of:

• previous decisions, ie what has been done or not done previously
• existing policies and procedures, or
• expectations or requirements imposed by external factors or authorities.
• read Jean’s Definition of a Quality System – you’ll find this under Definitions on this website

Related posts

• Summary of Jean’s address – VU Entrepreneurs Business Network Breakfast, 26th May (1)
• Owner/Managers as Managers, Leaders, Innovators and Entrepreneurs (0)
• My Spiritual Journey as an Independent Consultant – Chapter 7: Risk management is as relevant in spiritual journeying as in physical journeying (0)
• Jean’s Tool No. 2 – Team Tool (0)
• Jean Roberts Update: April/May 2010 (0)