Management

Eleven Key Attributes of a Good Property Manager

Property Management is a career profession. The industry allows for employment growth, continual learning experiences, and the opportunity to work with diverse people and income groups. The Property Manager can work either directly for an owner of real estate properties, or for a property management company, contracted by an owner or legal entity to care for the real estate over a specific period of time.

The Property manager has a fiduciary relationship with the management company and property owner. A fiduciary relationship is one that is based on a mutual trust and complete confidence in one another.

The Property Manager is provided an owner’s real estate portfolio to manage to its “highest and best use” in exchange for an employment contract or salary. Real estate assignments for the property manager includes apartment buildings, condominiums, hotels, storage facilities, shopping centers, office buildings, government subsidized properties, rooming houses, abandoned buildings and plots of vacant land, to name a few.

I have managed almost all of the above types of properties for over twenty years. I have managed public and private housing, for non-profit organizations, for the federal government, and for private developers and real estate investors. I also owned my own property management company for eight years. I now teach, speak, and write about property management standards and techniques. Here are some crucial skills, which I know from first hand experience, must be accepted as required attributes and learned skills in order to be a good property manager.

1. Must Know and Stay Current on Local Ordinances and State Laws

Managers are required to perform their work according to the laws of the land. The government (city, state, and federal) dictates how real estate is to be managed, from requiring a real estate license (depending on the state), to the use of the real estate (such as rent control laws). From proper trash removal to how and where we must keep security deposits, the manager has to keep abreast of the many legal requirements of managing real estate. If a mistake is made or a task is forgotten, it could cost the owner his or her property, and/or a management company’s reputation, loss of the account, or even the loss of real estate licenses.

2. Must Be Highly Ethical and Honest

Property Managers work on the Honor Code when they handle other people’s money. By collecting rent, security deposits, laundry machine money et al, the property manager holds a fiduciary relationship with the property owner and/or management company. The owner entrusts the property with thousands of dollars each month, plus the value of the real estate itself. The manager is hired to perform at his or her highest level of integrity. On a daily basis, the property manager’s good judgment and sense of what is right and wrong is called into play.

3. Must be Detail Oriented and Organized

Managers collect the rent daily, and must ensure that each rent is paid and posted to the tenants’ account as received. Financial records detailing each and every rent transaction are kept, either by rent cards, or on the computer. Lease expirations and renewals, rent increase letters, and rent invoices must be mailed on time. lines for court appearances must be kept, and clients must receive their written monthly report of operations. A skilled property manager is able to multi-task, keep site files organized, and prioritize repairs and assignments.

4. Must Have Good Communication Skills

Managers must be able to communicate with people from all walks of life, cultures, ethnicities, and personalities. Managers must be able to articulate their cases in front of judges, talk to the owner, negotiate with vendors as well as speak appropriately with tenants, who are often frustrated, upset, or angry. A good manager must be able to stay calm, and communicate in a professional manner. Familiarity speaking in other languages is always a plus.

5. Must have Good Computer Skills

Computer competency is a technical skill, like driving, typing, etc. The use of email, mail merge, and faxing through the computer is at the heart of property management today. This is especially true if the property is on one part of the city or state, and the home office is a distance away from the site. If a manager does not have a solid command of the computer and its basic programs, such as Microsoft Word and the spreadsheet Excel, you may be hard pressed to find an administrative position in this field.

6. Should Like Working with the Public

If everyone paid the rent on time by the fifth day of each month, the manager would not have rent collection work to do. If a property never had problems, such as toilet overflows, lost keys, or defective smoke detectors, a property manager would have little to do. Therefore, it is important that a manager enjoy dealing with people with problems. A manager should at least like helping tenants with dignity, and in a responsible manager. If you do not like being interrupted several times a day with a dilemma to solve, this type of job may not be for you.

7. Must Be Patient and Have a Sense of Humor

There is some pressure involved working with the public. There are days when nothing seems to go right, and if you happen to have a headache that day, it could be a long 9 to 5. A calm personality or a good sense of humor will take you a long way in property management. If you tend to be high-strung, anxious, or become angry or impatient while working with tight deadlines or with people with problems, you may want to re-consider taking on this profession.

8. Must Like to Read and Conduct Research

There are many types of leases, agreements, forms, and other legal documents that must be signed between tenants, the manager, government agencies, the site attorney, and/or the owner. Real estate and governmental regulations change; the manager must be willing to read up on them and stay current. Documentation must be read and checked before submitted to tenants, agencies, the owner, etc. If you do not like to read in order to keep up with the latest trends, legal and industry changes and terminology used, you will not be able to properly do your job.

9. Must Have a Strong Sense of Duty and Commitment

Ensuring that the tenants under your control are treated with respect, have heat and hot water, are not subjected to or committing illegal activities or disruptive behavior of their neighbors, are some of the managers’ duties. Tenants depend on the manager’s sense of obligation to the property and the families or professionals who live in it. The manager may not always have the funds to do everything all the time, but what can and should be done, such as keeping the building clean, and having a sense of urgency to get work completed in a timely manner.

10. Should be Flexible-Minded

Property Management is a fluid profession, in that it follows economic, governmental, industry, and societal changes that impacts how a property is managed. Managers who still like the “good old days” of mistreating tenants and making rental applicants jump through unnecessary hoops to get an apartment (or the opposite, by not checking anything), will find him or herself out of touch, and maybe out of a job. The ability to accept changes of law, obey fair housing laws, have a positive, or at least a neutral, attitude about people who are different, and above all, to be open-minded, is a key element of a successful manager.

11. Must Be an Excellent Follow-Up Person

A manager can never assume that a repair or rent payment plan will happen on its own. Our mantra is: “Follow Up, Follow Up, Follow Up!” This is one of the most critical skills of a good property manager. The ability to multi-task, keeping several balls in the air without dropping any of them is challenging, and difficult at times. The ability to successfully multi-task is often rewarded both financially and in promotion decisions.

How do we Manage?

 

I want to thank those of you who inundated my e-mail queue and
responded to my blog with your comments and observations regarding
these articles. From your remarks, it sounds like there is little management
being applied in the area of Information Technology or in the corporate
world in general. I jokingly refer to the absence of management in
the workplace as Theory Zero (0), but perhaps it is time to revisit the three
accepted theories of management and see what is actually being used.

THE THREE THEORIES OF MANAGEMENT

Before we begin, let us not forget that all of our actions are based
on human perceptions, whether they be real of fallacious. Consequently, the
three theories of management are based on perceptions, e.g., how we
perceive the character of our workers. If we believe people will act or react
to certain situations in a specific way, we will use this in our management
philosophy, be it brute force, carrot-and-stick, or permitting freewill. From
this basis, let’s consider how the three theories apply:

THEORY X (“Dictatorial Management”) – This is derived from “Scientific
Management,” a concept best illustrated by the time-and-motion studies of a
late nineteenth century industrial engineer named Frederick W.
Taylor. Taylor observed the workers under his supervision at the Midvale
Steel Company in Philadelphia brought their own shovels to work regardless
of what size coal lumps they would have to shovel. He suggested to
management that the company furnish shovels corresponding to the size
and weight of the individual load, thus increasing the total amount
of coal each worker could shovel in a day. Efficiency and production,
the Theory X cornerstone, led to the assembly line and industrial production.

The philosophy of Theory X management style is based on the view of
human nature as:

1. People have a natural aversion to work.

2. People need to be coerced, controlled, and threatened with punishment to get them to put forth adequate effort toward the achievement of company goals.

3. The average person prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid responsibility, has little ambition, and wants security most.

Theorists now ask how much of this behavior described is
inherent human nature and how much is behavior learned from
bosses who manage with those assumptions. Perhaps the
assumptions become self-validating: workers who are always
treated by an authoritarian management as though they were lazy,
tend to behave that way.

THEORY Y (“Participatory Management”) – Most observers agree that
the Theory Y management philosophy was derived from a series of
experiments in the 1930′s at the Western Electronic Hawthorne Works
in Chicago. Employees had been divided into two groups: a “test” group
that worked under changing lighting conditions and a “control” group
that worked under constant lighting. When the test group’s
light conditions improved, their productivity increased, as
expected. But what mystified researchers was a similar jump in
productivity when illumination worsened. To compound the
mystery, the control group’s output rose when the test group’s
did. It was concluded that both groups felt management was giving
them special attention and so responded with improved
performance. This discovery of human relations management was
called Theory Y.

Theory Y’s assumptions represent a much more positive
assessment of human behavior and gave rise to the thousands
of mentoring and management training programs in the 1960′s and
70′s, the purposes of which were to help managers change their
assumptions of human nature from a Theory X to a Theory Y
outlook. The basic premises of Theory Y include:

1. The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or rest.

2. External control and threat of punishment are not the only means for bringing about effort toward corporate goals. People will exercise self-direction and self-control to achieve goals they find important.

3. Commitment to objectives is in proportion to the rewards associated with their achievement.

4. The average human being learns under proper conditions not only to accept but to seek responsibility.

5. The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity, and creativity in solving work problems is widely, not narrowly, present in the population.

6. Under the conditions of modern industrial life, the brain power of the average human is only partially utilized.

THEORY Z (“Group Involvement”) – Theory Z was introduced in
1981 by UCLA Professor Dr. William Ouchi in his book of the same
name. It is based on Ouchi’s observations of Japanese management
practices of the time. Basically, Theory Z promotes employee
participation in decision-making, thereby increasing their motivation
and productivity. This management style emphasizes long range
planning, consensus decision making, and neutral worker-employee loyalty.

Ouchi concludes that Japanese managers got more out of
their employees than U.S. managers because the whole structure
of Japanese society encourages mutual trust and cooperation. This
management philosophy is based on the following assumptions:

1. Long term, even life time, employment is expected by both managers and employees.

2. Employees need freedom and opportunity to “grow.”

3. Decisions should be group decisions involving workers and managers.

4. Subordinates are whole people at work (in contrast to being thought of as titles or units of production).

5. Management has a broad concern for subordinate welfare.

6. Open communication, both vertically and horizontally, is the norm.

7. There is complete trust among groups and individuals because they all have the same goals – the good of the organization.

8. Cooperation, not competition, is the basis for relationships within the company.

We have been conducting business in Japan since 1976 and have
personally seen Theory Z in action. For example, when we sold our
“PRIDE” Methodologies in Japan, we would have to make several
sales presentations to a single company in order for all of the affected parties
to reach a consensus as to whether this was the correct course of action
for the company to pursue. After several months of deliberations, we
would finally get a contract. Contrast this to American companies where we
would make a single sales presentation to top management and close
on the sale within a few days or weeks. However, to the credit of the Japanese,
because everyone approved of the purchase, they all made an effort
to successfully install and use it; if they failed, they would “lose face.” Western
managers, on the other hand, would shove the product down people’s
throats (a la Theory X), thereby the methodologies were viewed as the will
of a single person and not the company overall. Consequently, when the
manager left the company, “PRIDE” followed shortly behind.

WHICH IS BETTER?

Most managers favor Theory X, others Theory Y. A few are likely to become
Theory Z managers. Most, however, use some combination of the three. There
is no “right” style of management because the appropriate style depends on
the kind of people you employ and the kind of business you run.

But what is the current trend? During the second half of the 20th century
there was a definite movement from Theory X to Theory Y. But now it appears
the pendulum is swinging back to Theory X. As mentioned in my “Bean counter”
article, mentoring and employee training programs (a cornerstone of Theory Y) is
being phased out as a means of cutting costs. Further, under the “Parenting
Management” scenario, younger employees need considerably more supervision
and direction, which lends itself to a Theory X philosophy.

Even Theory Z in Japan is showing signs of erosion. Although the Japanese
economy ran well in the 1980′s, it has slowed considerably over the last
fifteen years, causing the Japanese to rethink how they compete and
conduct business in a fast-paced world economy. Japanese managers realize
they no longer have the luxury of waiting months to make a group decision
and although they still wish to be loyal to the workforce, they realize certain
sacrifices are inevitable. Further, thanks to Hollywood and the Internet, younger
Japanese workers no longer share the same values as their predecessors. Frankly,
they have picked up a lot of bad work habits from their Western counterparts. Concepts
such as lifetime employment, corporate loyalty, and hard work is slowly evaporating
from the Japanese business culture.

BACK TO PERCEPTIONS

How we elect to manage others or how we elect to be managed is based on our
perceptions. For example, if we believe a person to be lazy, we will apply
a Theory X style of management. But if we believe people are responsible,
take initiative, and are successful, then Theories Y and Z are used.

As I mentioned in “Parenting Management,” a generation gap has emerged
between management and the latest generation of workers. Management
perceives today’s young workers as immature, disorganized, undisciplined,
and shirk responsibility. Whether this is true or not is immaterial. It is perceptions
that count. Because of this, it should come as no small wonder that Theory X
management practices are on the rise again.

For those younger workers who are as frustrated with management as
management is with you, the only advice I can offer is that you make a
concerted effort to improve your interpersonal relations/communications
skills. If you have garnered anything from this article, it is that appearances
are extremely important. Your physical appearance, forms of speech and
conduct all play a significant role in how you are perceived by management. Are
you someone who is bright but doesn’t know how to apply your skills, or do
you have a proven track record for performance? In other words, it is
time to grow up. As President Calvin Coolidge observed years ago:

“Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men
with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a
proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated
derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.
The slogan ‘Press On’ has solved and always will solve the
problems of the human race.”

CONCLUSION

Management is more of a benevolent dictatorship as opposed to a democracy. It
operates according to its own whims. If management wants to be tyrannical, it
will. If it wants to allow group participation, it will. And if it elects to do nothing,
it will. But understand this, management’s style is based on what the manager
believes is good for the company and how they perceive their workers. Sometimes
the actions of management will seem strange and without justification. But there
may be some very rational reasons for acting as such, perhaps for strategic or
tactical purposes. There is little the worker can do in this regards aside from
mutiny, which is rarely the proper decision. To overcome this problem,
it behooves management to promote loyalty and faith in judgment.

Management is about human relations, not numbers. If a manager stands by a
worker in the face of adversity, in all likelihood he will be building a good
employee for the company’s future. In return, the employee should pledge
allegiance to the manager. Years ago, I remember Les Matthies, the legendary
“Dean of Systems,” taught me that a man should always be loyal to his manager
while he is in his employment. If the worker doesn’t like the manager, he should
either curb his tongue or get out. Only after the worker has left, should he talk
trash about his manager and even then he should think twice about doing so.

Bottom-line, the manager’s style of management is based on his perceptions
of his workers, right or wrong. If the worker believes he is not being treated
fairly perhaps it is time to reexamine his relationship with the manager. And
that reexamination begins at the mirror. Do you perform enough work to just
get by or do you strive to achieve? Do you prefer to be told what to do or are you
self-motivated? Do you dress appropriately? What about your form of speech
and mannerisms? Habits? Remember, we as human-beings act on our
perceptions. Want to know where you are going in the company? Ask
yourself, “How am I perceived?”

Understanding And Coping With Difficult Managers

 

I have conducted countless management workshops in my professional life for various clients and the question that continuously is asked during the workshop is, “how do I manage my manager”? I hear such comments as, “my manager should attend this workshop” or, “my manager requires this workshop badly”.

Unfortunately, the participants who are saying these comments are not alone in their frustration. Based on my calculations, previous experiences and reading data based networks, approximately twenty eight per cent of all working Canadians believe that they work for a good manager; thirty eight per cent say they would fire their manager if they could; four per cent would have their manager assessed by a psychologist and thirty per cent would send their manager to management training.

No doubt, many people are a victim of circumstance and wind up working for a manager who is weak and ineffective. We don’t often choose the manager we work for and we do not have to fall victim to their short comings. It is important to realize that we cannot control or change our manager but, we can control and change the way we interact with them.

It is true that some managers are just plain bad people. They have no respect for others nor do they respect their professional environment or the company they work for. These managers are miserable and their values evil; as a result, they don’t respect themselves. Although these types of managers are few and far between, you may work for a manager like this. Should this be the case, there is virtually nothing that you can do about it. Accept the fact that this is the situation and make a decision to stay or leave.

On the hand, most difficult managers are not aware of the fact that they are difficult. They actually think they are good managers setting good examples of leadership. Understanding why and how your manager has gone off track may help you choose the best strategy for working with him or her.

Here Are Seven Reasons Why Managers Are Difficult:

Micro management

Some managers have been embarrassed by someone’s poor performance in the past and they are determined not to let this happen again. As a result, they are involved in every detail and decision that takes place in the business unit usually confusing results with activities. This is compounded when the manager’s boss expects him or her to micro manage the daily activities of the business unit. Micro managing leads to ineffective time and priority management skills and eventually disconnects the boss from subordinates.

In over their heads

Many difficult managers have been promoted to their current position because of their technical skills, their good attendance record, their willingness to work extra hours or their friendly non threatening relationship with their boss. Critical management skills such as organizational skills, leadership skills and decision making skills are given little or no consideration, resulting in an ineffective and at times a burdensome manager.

Management by numbers

Too many managers have been trained to manage by numbers. They are firmly committed to letting the budget manage them rather than take the initiative to manage the budget. These managers make all decisions solely based on the numbers regardless of the collateral damage in the workplace. People are disposable balance sheet items that are expected to get the job completed within the pre determined financial parameters.

Bad boss mentor syndrome

Most difficult managers learn at the feet of the master and unfortunately were promoted to their current position by the master. Mentored by bad examples, they in turn mimicked the same bahaviours. The master has taught them the art of micro management, management by numbers and the take no prisoner approach by being rudely blunt and talking down to subordinates.

Overworked

Difficult managers all have one thing in common; they are fire fighters. Not only do they micro manage they are in the thick of many confrontations leaving little or no time to be proactive and get the job done. This can be disastrous for a difficult manager because s/he begins to work harder; not smarter, they push harder on their people to get the job done and become intolerant to mistakes. They are ineffective because they are ill equipped to deal with the pressures that today’s business opportunities bring causing their lack of leadership and analytical skills to become evident. There is little or no time for professional development as training may be seen as a sign of personal weakness or a luxury that the manager or subordinates cannot afford or don’t require.

Poor communicators

In the world of information technology many leaders feel compelled to increase communication through the utilization of email, high speed internet and black berry’s. Difficult managers tend to over use these methods by sending off emails to address challenges that should be addressed face to face or, at the very least over the telephone. To carry the problem further, some have reverted to conducting performance evaluations via email in order to reduce time constraints that have been caused by being overworked. The more connected a difficult manager gets to the information highway the more disconnected and disoriented become the subordinates.

Selective feedback

Many difficult managers surround themselves with “yes” people. People who tell them they are doing well when their performance is terrible. Since they are apt to surround themselves with people that exemplify their behaviour, they really don’t know that their performance is less than satisfactory. They intentionally or unintentionally choke off open and honest feedback and believe they are doing a good job because, no one has told them differently.

Strategies For Coping With A Difficult Manager:

You cannot manage something that you cannot control. Many of us have tried to manage our personal relationship’s and we have found that we are worse off in comparison to when we started. If you can control something then, you can manage it. Difficult managers are much the same. They cannot be managed because they cannot be controlled. We can cope with but, not control a difficult manager.

Here are seven strategies you might consider when coping with a difficult manager.

Support your manager

Do not, under any circumstance put down or bad mouth your manager in front of subordinates, peers or other managers. This is known as mutiny and the consequence of such can be severe. Ensure that your manager gets an abundance of credit for the work that you have done, even if s/he doesn’t deserve it. In all your tasks, make sure that you cater to their strengths and be quick to play down or avoid their weaknesses.

Be an initiator

You have heard the saying, “it is better to beg forgiveness than ask for permission”. The same can be said when dealing with a difficult manager. Establish your top goals and objectives (four to six is very manageable), get your manager’s input, adjust accordingly and make it happen. Keep your manager informed on a regular basis and reset priorities only when absolutely necessary. Difficult managers will leave you alone because they are over matched and you are the least of their challenges. They may even view you as being a star performer because you are the least of their challenges.

Crash manage priorities

If you are a star performer, sooner or later your manager will come to you with urgent matters. When s/he does, pull out your previously agreed upon list and ask what items are to be moved or rearranged in order to accommodate the request. Focus your energy on those items that you can control and cautiously select those elements that you believe you can influence.

See the political landscape for what it is

Everything in business is political except politics, that’s personal. Learn how to play the political game by determining who the players are and how the game is played. Remember, organizational politics is a function of responsibility, accountability, authority and influence and, it is part of the organizational landscape. If you have more than one person working in your organization ; you have politics. Politics pervades our daily working life. That means building strategic relationships with others that might include personal trust and professional networks. The key is to remember 30% of people are doers, 50% are fence sitters and 20% are naysayers. Work with the 30% because these are the people who are willing to move ahead and make things happen.

Be credible

The biggest intangible you have to deliver your boss is your credibility. Do what you say you are going to do, do it with passion, professionalism and exceed expectations. Never under deliver, over promise or compromise your commitments to others. Credibility will establish leadership potential and keep you in good stead with the manager and others.

Timing is everything

You must be patient and wait for the right time to approach your manager. Are they more receptive in the morning or afternoon? Is s/he more receptive to one on one conversations, team meetings or carefully worded proposals? Many times they are going to have bad encounters with others and this is usually accompanied with negative consequences. It’s a good idea to anticipate these encounters and never approach him / her afterwards.

Don’t be a victim of circumstance

Remember, you cannot manage those things that you cannot control and you cannot control your manager. Always be building professional relationships within the organization with your peers, your manager’s peers and other business unit leaders. Your best strategy to not becoming a victim is having a well planned exit strategy.

The Death of Management

 

I have a good friend who was recently elevated to the job title of “Systems Manager”
at a large Fortune 500 company in the U.S. Midwest. As someone who has been in
the Information Systems field for over 30 years now, my interest was piqued and I asked
her how big of a staff she was going to manage and what kind of systems she was
going to be responsible for administrating. She told me she had no staff and her
responsibilities primarily included going to user sites and helping them setup their
laptop computers with office suites and pertinent Internet software.

This is certainly not how I have come to understand the concept of a “Systems”
person or, for that matter, a “Manager.” What she described was more of a technical
or clerical role as opposed to one of management. But I guess the times are changing.

I always viewed “management” as a people oriented function, not a mechanical
function (which is why “man” is used as part of the word). I define it as, “getting
people to do what you want, when you want it, and how you want it.” But perhaps
I am beginning to date myself as more and more “managers” are appearing with
fewer and fewer people involved. Even though the title is flourishing, I contend
true management is becoming a thing of the past.

WHY IS MANAGEMENT DISAPPEARING?

First, we have to understand that managers are in the business of conquering
objectives and solving problems in the workplace through people. If we lived in a perfect
world where everyone knew what they were suppose to do and when they were suppose
to do it by, there would not be a need for managers. Inevitably, this rarely occurs as
people are social animals and rarely agree on anything, particularly on how to perform
a given task. Hence, a manager is needed to establish direction and referee. As such,
managers are the field generals for their departments.

There are three basic attributes of a manager: Leadership, Environment, and Results.
Let’s consider each separately and how they have evolved:

1. LEADERSHIP

To properly coordinate human resources, an effective manager should always be at least
one step ahead of his staff. This requires visionaries who inspire confidence in their troops
and can set them marching in the right direction. The problem though is that little, if any,
planning is being performed in corporate America. Instead, we are content to react to
calamities as opposed to looking into the future and trying to anticipate problems. As
a small example, we are now embroiled in a tempest over the Hurricane Katrina disaster
in New Orleans. Engineers have long known that the levees used to keep the sea out
of the city were inadequate for a category four or five hurricane (Katrina was a category
four). In fact, I saw a documentary on this very subject just weeks prior to the disaster. Now, we
have local, state and federal government agencies rushing to correct the problems (and
doing a lot of finger pointing in the process). As costly as it would have been to fix the
levees, it would have been a spit in the bucket when compared to the costs to clean up the
aftermath.

In the corporate world, Detroit is reeling from the types of automobiles now being
imported into this country. Asia has stolen Detroit’s thunder who now finds itself
offering cash incentives to stem the tide. It is no secret America has developed an
ever-increasing dependency on foreign oil, and is now saddled with an aging oil
refinery infrastructure and a shaky economy. Why then was Detroit surprised to see their
market share take a nose-dive in favor of quality fuel-efficient automobiles from overseas?

The point is, our planning and leadership skills are at an all time low. Why? Because
it is easier to react to a problem than to do a little planning; easier, but costlier. Let’s face
it, planning is hard work and, as the old adage goes, “You can pay me now or you can pay
me later, but you are going to pay me.” Planning is a projection into the unknown and involves
a certain level of risk that most people are not willing to assume (and are afraid to do so).
Consequently, our society is more interested in safety nets than in taking risks. I guess this
is why I admire gamblers who mentally calculate their odds for success and are unafraid of
taking risks.

Nonetheless, American competitors (and our enemies) fully understand our weakness as
planners and are not afraid of taking the risks that we balk at. As a result, they will continue
to take advantage of us until such time as we get some serious leadership.

2. ENVIRONMENT

In order to set workers to task it is necessary for a manager to establish a
suitable work environment. This includes:

  • Defining the location of the workplace, hours of operation, and corporate policies to be observed (e.g., payroll, benefits, performance reviews, etc.).
  • Defining the methodologies, tools and techniques to be used by the workers in their assignments.
  • Defining the corporate culture – Although this is normally defined by the company overall, the astute manager establishes the ethics, customs and social intercourse to be observed within his area of responsibility (a subculture). By doing so, the manager has defined the code of conduct in the department denoting what will be tolerated and what will not.

As part of the corporate culture, the manager defines his own personal style of
management, for example:

  • The types and level of discipline, organization, and accountability expected from the workers.
  • Will the manager try to micromanage everything (top-down) or empower his people, delegate responsibility and manage “bottom-up”?
  • How employees are evaluated and rewarded; by accomplishments or by political maneuvering.

The manager’s objective is to create a homogeneous working environment whereby
everyone is “rowing on the same oar” towards common objectives. Unfortunately, the
problem here is that our society is now more inclined to accept rugged individualism
as opposed to team effort. For example, employees are commonly rewarded based on
individual initiative as opposed to group effort. Between this spirit of individualism
and government regulations that embolden employees to resist the company, loyalty and
teamwork are at all-time lows and apathy and restlessness permeates corporate
America. Such spirit disrupts the harmony of the work environment, thus compounding
the problems of the manager.

3. RESULTS

Ultimately, the manager is charged with the responsibility of producing a product or
performing a service. As such, the manager must establish and prioritize
assignments, and assure they are accomplished in a timely and cost effective
manner. This requires managers who can articulate assignments and coordinate
resources towards this end. Sounds pretty simple, right? Then why are we failing
in this regard? Three reasons:

  • Managers are more interested in gamesmanship than actually producing anything of merit. They have developed a “fast track” mentality whereby managers have little interest in their current job and want to advance to the next plateau in their career. “Long-term” planning is no longer measured in years, but rather in months or weeks (a “long-term” project is now considered three to six months in length). Consequently, managers are primarily interested in quick and dirty solutions which will see them through their tenure of office, but will create burdens later on for their successors. Managers now spend more time scheming and maneuvering than worrying about getting the job done. What’s the sure sign of such a manager? He/she knows the latest buzzwords and is always “politically correct.”
  • Managers are no longer results oriented, Instead, they are more focused on the process or mechanics of getting a job done. Although it is desirable to be well organized and precise in our work effort, it is for naught if you cannot deliver what you are charged to produce. The manager needs to be focused on deliverables, not mechanics (with apologies to the ISO 9000 folks).
  • Managers no longer hold people accountable for their actions. This is due, in part, to government regulations that are more concerned about the rights of the employees as opposed to the manager’s. As a result, managers spend less time managing and more time supervising people. Understand this: there are substantial differences between management and supervision; the two are most definitely not synonymous. Supervision is much more “hands on” with employees being continually watched and directed in their work assignments. Managers should manage more and supervise less, and employees should do more self-supervision. Unfortunately, this philosophy is not in vogue these days. Workers no longer seek responsibility and prefer to be told what to do thereby they cannot be held accountable if something goes awry. This alone says a lot about our society and is worrisome to me.

Let us never forget, unless you can deliver what you are charged to perform, you
are a failure as a manager. Consider the numerous coaches and managers in
the world of sports who have been fired over the years, not necessarily because
they didn’t run fine programs, but because they lost sight of the end result: winning.

CONCLUSION

What I have described thus far pertains primarily to large corporations. Management
is still alive and well in small businesses that are not encumbered with bureaucracy
and need to manage simply to survive. I have also been primarily describing corporate
America, but many of these bad habits are creeping into the management style of Asian
and European companies as well.

Now and then, I like to make an analogy between management and dieting. There
is nothing magical about losing weight; you simply watch what you eat and get some
exercise. However, millions of dollars are spent on the latest diet craze, usually to
no avail. The same is true with management; you simply need some leadership,
organization and follow-up and you will get the results you want. However, it
seems companies today do everything but manage.

Beyond this, our social fabric and government regulations discourages
effective management. Instead of discipline, organization and accountability, we
are more concerned with nurturing free-spirited individualism, gamesmanship, and
chasing panaceas. In many cases, managers are inhibited by the press who
scrutinizes decisions, particularly in the government sector. Fearing to make
a bad decision, managers suffer paralysis and nothing is accomplished.

Bottom-line, corporate America is no longer managing; instead, we are playing
games or as I like to call it, “Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.” In other
words, as the ship is going down, we tend to focus our attention on everything other
than saving the ship or passengers. In the past we have talked about Theories X, Y, Z
for describing different styles of management. Perhaps we should describe today’s
management style as “Theory Zero.”

What is needed is someone who isn’t afraid of taking the reigns and is allowed
to run the department to produce the necessary results – that is the job of a
manager. Let me give you a small example. Recently, I attended a meeting for a
nonprofit organization who wanted to draft legislation for the association. The
meeting started out pleasantly enough but quickly slipped into an uncontrollable
series of arguments. I could tell by the confused look on the faces of the attendees
that the meeting was out of control and so I grabbed the gavel and brought the
meeting to order. I next divided the group into subcommittees to discuss the
different issues and gave them a deadline to produce a rough draft of the
legislation. Within each subcommittee I appointed a chairman, a secretary,
and someone to research the legislation. I then went outside to smoke my
cigar. When I came back to the room, bedlam had been replaced by quiet
organization. The legislation was drafted according to my instructions and the
members left the building saying it was one of the best meetings they had
attended. Why? Because a manager took the gavel.

One last note which I will specifically address to my colleagues in the IT Industry;
In my 30 years in this field I have never encountered a technical problem that
cannot be conquered by good old-fashioned management. I’ll bet this is true
in any industry, not just IT.