INCREASING MANAGERIAL FLOW
[The Pistol]
An owner renowned for his upbeat personality, gentle character and wise manner was having difficulties with one of his department heads. The young man was his exact opposite, rash and critical, able to wipe out an employee with a single comment. The owner called in a consultant who then interviewed the manager and administered psychological tests. He diagnosed the man with a personality disorder and recommended the man be let go immediately if he did not report to counseling immediately. Even then, he would have to be watched carefully so that he prospered in the therapy and functioned according to company dictates.
The owner mentioned this at a social gathering and asked if we would agree with the consultant's conclusions, based on what he told us. We asked to meet with the owner and go over the details with him, to see if our recommendations would concur.
Meeting with the Owner
The owner oversaw the young man's rise from an assistant's job in plant maintenance. He admired his energy and perseverance. At every step the man distinguished himself; his troubling behavior as a manager was something new. Yet his department was the most successful one, on every measure of productivity. The man had a fire in his belly, and he pushed his staff to the lim it.
As we explored the owner's concerns about ordering the man into therapy or firing him, we found that his admiration went deep. He felt he was being forced to act because of a growing insurrection in that particular department. The young man had pushed his staff to the breaking point. We silently noted how different the men were, and how they each found success through very opposite personalities.
We agreed to meet with the manager, observe his department and report back before the week was up.
Behavioral Assessment
The young man was bright, highly capable and not very interested in the emotional or social needs of his staff. He had a vision of what had to be done and understood his staff as implementers. He did not ask for feedback, and we observed him being directive, strong and willful. Observation revealed very low frequencies in the following Flow-Of-Work Behaviors:
He was very practiced in a number of other F-O-W Behaviors:
Observations were made over a period of three days. Some staff members were quite vocal in their criticisms. This manager had changed the tenor of the company. He was as base and evil as the owner was supportive and understanding. In studying how we could best help, we stayed away from the staff assessments and concentrated on the owner's question: should he force the manager into therapy with the threat of firing him, or was there some other approach at his disposal?
The department was successful and efficient. The company was passing its own benchmarks, but at the risk of destroying employee relations. We talked with the owner again before writing up our assessment. He feared that the manager would not accept therapy or coaching and he further expressed his admiration for the man's good points.
Implementation
In this case, the report itself served as an implementation. We understood that the relationship between the owner and his star department head was a special one. We concentrated our report on that fact. Our thinking was that the personality differences between the owner and his manager prevented the young man from learning the successful strategies of his mentor. Our job here was to expand the modeling potential of the owner, and the imitative learning of the manager.
The Flow-of-Work could be increased if we could forge this connection between the two men. We remembered an old adage that could capture the mean-spirited nature of the young man in a way that could increase Flow. We gave the following advice to the owner: "This fellow Nick may be a monster, but he's your monster. You ought to consider calling a department meeting, and with your arm around Nick, address the staff. "Nick here may be a monster, but he's my monster.'"
The owner took a moment to recoup, but then he broke into guffaws. Of course! He was connected to the young man and it was about time he proclaimed the news in a very public way. As we talked it out, he recognized the economy of it. He was going to do it for Nick, the department and the company at large. This had a good chance of increasing flow.
A few days later the owner called a meeting of Nick's department, and put his arm around the young man. "Nick here may be a monster, but he's my monster!" Over the next months, the owner realized the desired outcome. Nick more purposefully and consciously used the owner as a model for effective leadership and criticisms and complaints in that department dissolved. It can also be said that the owner stifled negative talk in the department with his announcement. He made it clear that critiques had much less of a chance to be heard. But if that was true, then something truly unexpected happened. The staff also relaxed, and retention in that department stabilized. In the coming years Nick took on many of the positive attributes of the owner, even though their personalities remained different.
Summary
A Flow-Of-Work assessment revealed a department working at peak productivity, while resistance was building and a solution was being sought by the employees and the owner alike. The department head was considered cruel, mean-tempered and punitive, in those ways the complete opposite of the man who hired him and helped him move up the organizational ladder.
A consultant had highlighted pathological aspects of the department head's behavior and recommended that he be fired if he did not agree to intensive and long-term psychological intervention. The owner wanted an alternative, and this suggested how the fate and future of the two men was somehow entwined.
Our assessment focused not only on the department head but on the company as one, organized system. We noted the connection between the department head and the owner, the differences in their approaches, and the need to further integrate the system. This led to an elegantly simple report that the owner was able to use with good effect. It worked because it was not only a communication to the department head and to the employees, but to the owner himself. He found a way to broach the problems the department head was creating, while also taking a decisive stand on his loyalty to that man.
This approach to the problem involved principles of behaviorism, psychodynamic theory and systems theory, with a healthy dose of experience gained working with people over the last four decades. It took into account the ability of the owner to act as the implementer of the plan, and he did a marvelous job.
Return to the Vignette main page