Hot Management Info for 2004 

December 2004 - Wanted: Management Skills

About 30% of managers and executives severely lack the necessary management skills, according to a recent survey of 133 companies by Right Management Consultants, a career transition and organizational consulting company based in Philadelphia.

While 40% are considered good leaders, 30% are "management-challenged," and the other 30% are in the middle. Companies need to not only guide the bottom 30% upward, but to watch out for the middle third of managers, who may break either way.

Among the findings of the survey are:

1. The most desired management skill is good communication, followed by a sense of vision, honesty, decisiveness, and ability to build good relationships with employees.
   
2. Women say a higher percentage of managers and executives are "management-challenged" than do men. Women say 33% of managers lack necessary skills; men say only 25% do.

Source: Training Magazine November 2004

to top

November 2004 - Managers MUST Manage

My October article on "A Bias For Action" hit home with many of our readers. However, one reader said, "Great information! Now what are the solutions to the problems you described?"

Most planning directors or similar managers have both operational tasks and management tasks. Only managers in very large organizations spend much of their time on management.

How do most managers learn management? They were good planners and were then appointed to a management position. Give any one of these managers an operational task and a management task at the same time and they will almost always do the operational task first. Meanwhile, important management tasks are not getting done. Others in the organization can do the operational task. Only the manager can do the management tasks.

In my classes, I illustrate the problem using a real life example from one of my contracts. The organization had a high-volume front counter activity staffed by six planners. When the counter got very busy, the manager of the counter activities came out to help out. Was that good or bad? Most students say that is good.

I told the manager that next time I came to town and found her at the front counter, I would padlock her to her desk. Why would I say that?

Her staff were not trained, they were not clear on the mission, and they did not have good systems and guidelines for the work. She could spend all of her time at the counter and things would not improve. She needed to invest in her people and carry out her management tasks. Once this is done, then helping out at the counter is fine.

Time and time again in my management studies, I find managers so bogged down in operational tasks that the management tasks are not getting done and the organization is suffering. So, what to do — how to do it?

The first step is to recognize that you must give priority to the management tasks. Managers must manage. If you don't want to do it, get out of management. Go back and be that great planner you may want to be anyway.

Set a block of time to only focus on management tasks. Try every Friday or every Friday afternoon. In one organization, the best I could get was two hours a week, but at least it was a start.

If you ever go into the office on a Saturday, refuse to look at your in box. On these days, only work on management tasks.

Let's hear from some of our readers and see how they get out of this box.

For good management,

Paul Zucker, FAICP
The Management Doctor

to top

I agree with your observations. Too many managers become managers due to past performance, not prospective performance. But then if you have managers who are operationally oriented who are appointing their managers, what do you expect? Our county used to have an excellent, outsourced managers training program that was intended not only to teach management techniques to current managers, but also to those persons identified by managers as prospective managers. It was an excellent way of keeping the eye on the management ball. Sadly, that program was the victim of budget cuts — mostly at the insistence of our elected officials who could not see the value of this system.

Michael A. Harper
Washoe County, NV

to top

October 2004 - A Bias For Action

Managers often confuse activity with accomplishments, and motivation with true leadership.*

The authors suggest that 90% of managers waste their time by procrastinating, becoming emotionally detached, and distracting themselves with busywork. They point out that only 10% of managers truly act purposefully to get the most important work accomplished. Managers tend to ignore or postpone dealing with the organization's most crucial issues. They spend their time making the inevitable happen instead of putting their energy into the exceptional things that create a company's future. Required is reflection, systematic planning, creative thinking, and time. Instead, managers let operational activities requiring more immediate attention squeeze important problems out.

Zucker Systems finds this same problem confronts most of the planning directors we work with. When we ask them why they are not getting important management tasks done, the answer is almost always the same. They are bogged down with operational tasks. Meanwhile the organization suffers from poor management.

The authors suggest the following four types of managers:

1. The Frenzied 40% of managers are distracted by the many tasks they juggle every day. They are highly energertic but very unfocused and appear to others as frenzied, desperate and hasty.
   
2. The Procrastinators 30% of managers procrastinate on doing the work that really matters to the organization because they lack both energy and focus. They often feel insecure and fear failure.
   
3. The Detached 20% of managers are disengaged from their work altogether. They are focused but lack energy and seem aloof, tense and apathetic.
   
4. The Purposeful Only 10% of managers get the job done. They are highly focused and energetic and come across as reflective and calm amid chaos.

*These are the words from a new book, A Bias For Action by Heike Bruch and Sumantra Ghoshal, Harvard Business School Publishing, 2004.

Great information! Now what are the solutions to the problems you described?

Leon Hughes
Prince George, VA

Thanks for the great insight, I look forward to your emails!

Laura C. Kuhn
Scotts Valley, CA

to top

September 2004 - Customer Service Issues In The Permit Process

Specific Permit Issues
Development and permitting activities can generally be divided into three broad categories. One category requires a field inspection but may not require a plan check. This category includes various electrical, plumbing or mechanical building permits. These are often referred to as ministerial permits. A second category of ministerial permits generally do not require any public notice and are approved by staff subject to review against a variety of ordinances or criteria. Building permits are generally included in this category. The third category is often referred to as discretionary permits. They often require some form of public notice and a public hearing before a hearing officer, planning commission or elected officials. My approach to each is described below.

• Ministerial Permits Not Requiring Plan Check
  These permits lend themselves to be received over the Internet or by Fax. Examples include many plumbing, electrical or mechanical permits.
  

• Ministerial Permits Requiring Plan Check
  As many of these permits as possible should be approved over the counter. This can reduce the amount of paperwork that enters the filing system. Additionally, since the applicant may be present during the review, questions can be clarified and answered on the spot. Generally, anything that can be processed in 45 minutes or less is a good candidate for over the counter permits. Examples include small residential remodels, residential garages, decks, signs and small tenant improvements. For these permits, the applicant should also have the option of having the application received and not processed over the counter.
  

• Discretionary Permits
  These permits require extensive plans, are received at a permit center and normally require review by a number of specialists, often in different divisions or even different departments. These plans often go through two or more review cycles. I see two key criteria that impacts the timelines for these projects. One is, how long does it take the staff of each function to review the plans? Often this requires visiting the site. Reasonable timelines for these staff activities generally vary from five to 20 working days. The second criteria is, how long does it take citizens to participate in the process? Ordinances often give notice 10 to 15 days before a public hearing. However, this is not long enough for most citizens to participate in the process. I recommend giving citizens early notice, i.e., shortly after an application is received.
  

• Application Completeness
  It is difficult for staff to meet review timelines when applications are not complete. Statutes and ordinances often allow 30 days to determine if an application is complete, after which mandatory processing times may take place or applications may vest against current adopted standards.
  There is considerable confusion surrounding the word "complete." Generally there are specific applications requirements, i.e., a certain number of copies, elevation drawings, certain technical reports, etc. One form of completeness is simply checking to see if these items are present at submittal. When they are not present the application is not taken in. This type of review does not meet the normal statutory definition of completeness. The statutory definition requires a bit more detailed review, often by a specialist. Trying to do this review at the counter can result in long wait lines. In these cases, I suggest the application be taken in for review.
  In many communities, staff tend to hide behind the 30-day rule and wait until day 30 to make the determination. This then impacts the project timeline. Instead, I suggest the completeness review be completed during the early stages of staff review, i.e., within the first 10 to 15 working days. This allows the applicant more time to submit whatever is required for completeness.
  

• Complete Reviews — Surprises
  A great frustration for many applicants is incomplete first staff reviews. The first review asks the applicant to make certain changes to their plans or proposal. The changes are made and plans are resubmitted. However, sometimes staff adds new comments that should have been made during the first review. Systems should be in place to monitor staff in relation to complete first reviews.

In Summary

• Addressing these issues requires amongst other things:

• Maximizing the use of Internet and Fax to provide public information and receive permits.
• Provide customers ready access to telephone services including returning all phone calls the same day received.
• Allowing appointments for service within a few days to a maximum of one week.
• Targeting counter wait times to 15 to 20 minutes for 90% of the customers with no waits longer than 45 minutes.
• Providing as many over-the-counter permits as possible for permits that can be processed within 45 minutes.
• Reviewing discretionary permits within five to 20 days for first review.
• Reviewing application completeness within 15 working days or less.
• Providing comprehensive first time reviews.

to top

August 2004 - The Development And Permitting Process

Customer Service — Philosophy and Theory

Why is Mission Important?
I often find considerable confusion amongst both policy makers and government staff in regards to the development permitting process. Current organizational theory suggests that for efficiency and effectiveness, it is imperative that organizations agree on the mission of the organization. If any changes are to be made in the permitting process it is imperative that policy makers and staff agree on the mission.

What is the Goal?
The development permitting process should be a process, not a policy. Some communities have used the following language to help clarify the development process:

• The development process should be clear and reasonably predictable; that is, both the developer or property owner and citizens should know what to expect from the process.
• The process should be policy-neutral, that is, the process itself should not be used to slow down development depending upon attitudes about "growth," "slow growth," or "no growth." Growth issues, if desired, should be dealt with by the policy makers and adopted as clear public policy.

Us vs. Them
It is not unusual that staff and citizens see the applicants as "the bad guys." Applicants on the other hand see staff, citizens and the process as simply standing in the way of their doing what they want to do. I am not comfortable with either of these approaches. I see communities being built or evolving through a partnership. This is a partnership between the applicants, government and citizens (see the dance of development as illustrated in the drawing below). Staff's role is not merely that of a regulator. Rather, the role is that of a problem solver. A problem solver with the ultimate goal of building a better community. Solving problems not only for the applicant but also for citizens and through creative use of ordinances and regulations. Citizens in one of our clients described it this way, "So, after the project is completed, the three of us (applicant, government and citizens) surround the project hand in hand, singing kumbya."

The Dance of Development

Impact of Poor Development Permitting Processes
It is not unusual that staff and citizens fail to see the true impact of a poor development and permitting process. This will vary if the applicant is a developer, a homeowner or a business.

• Developer
  A key issue for the developer is time. Developers will either be paying for the project with cash out of their pocket and/or often with construction loans. Either way, there is a cost when there are delays in the process. These costs can be substantial. So much so that most developers will gladly pay increased fees if they can have their projects proceed on a timely basis. This includes not only plan approval, but the inspection process as well.
  It is not unusual that staff and citizens don't see this as a problem. Delay simply means that the developer will see less profit. In some cases this may be true. However, the more likely scenario is that the increased cost is passed along to the consumer, either in the form of a more expensive product, or in the form of decreased quality. What policy maker would publicly say that they want to increase costs to the consumers or reduce the quality of the community?

• Homeowner
  The homeowner is often also interested in a timely development permitting process. Often their projects directly impact their quality of life. They may want to upgrade the kitchen or bath, add a bedroom for a new family member or an elderly member of the family, etc. They may personally take time off from work to processes the permit or stay at home for inspections. All of this interrupts their life and is either a direct or indirect cost.

• Businesses
  The development permitting process impacts both proposed new businesses and existing businesses. Like developers, there is a financial cost to pay for delay in the plan approval or inspection process. However, there are also other costs to pay, which can be deadly for the business. A new business may have targeted an opening date. Related to the opening date is the hiring of staff, an advertising program or targeting a window of opportunity.
  An existing business has similar concerns. They may need to expand or change to remain competitive or cost effective. In today's fast moving times, this can be particularly critical for the manufacturing sector. As one of our clients told us, "by the time we get the permit for a tenant improvement, we have already lost the order that created the need for the tenant improvement."

In summary, a poor development permitting process can add cost to the process resulting in higher end-product costs, decreased development quality, impact on citizens quality of life and lost business for both new and existing businesses.

Economic Development and Redevelopment
Some communities are interested in economic development or redevelopment. In these cases there is often debate as to how either of these activities relate to the development permitting process. Some suggest that the development permitting process is only one factor in economic development and often a small one. There is some validity to this argument. There are many decisions that go into economic development activities. Some of the hottest economic development communities in the United States also have notoriously complicated development processes. Examples include Austin, Texas and San Diego, California.

However, it would also be an exaggeration to conclude that the development permitting process has no relation to economic development. Each circumstance may be different. If all else is equal, why would a business decision select a community where the permit will take six months vs. a community where it will take 60 days?

Redevelopment activity is another often confused category. Staff for some of our clients felt that a redevelopment project is "just another developer" and should not be granted any "special treatment." This impression fails to recognize that a redevelopment project is created by the community as a means to resolve significant social/physical/economic problems in the selected project area. Often, a redevelopment project produces $4 to $7 of private investment for every $1 of public redevelopment money. Further, when correctly applied, redevelopment can reduce public costs and greatly enhance public revenues for the good of the entire community.

Thus, a community economic development strategy and redevelopment strategy need to be recognized as direct public policy deserving special attention and priority.

Specific Customer Service Issues
Good customer service has a number of common features, whether it is the development permitting process or other aspects of the consumer's life. With the information age, time seems to be central to most transactions. Closely related is clarity and accuracy of the transaction. There are various ways to apply these features to the development permitting process.

• Internet, Telephone/Voice Mail, Fax, Office Visits
  Driving to a government office for information or a transaction has a direct impact on the applicant's time as well as transportation costs. Ways to reduce these include:

  • Internet
    Permits that do not require plans can readily be processed over the Internet. Even when plans are required, some communities allow the application to be completed on the Internet with plans dropped off. New technology will gradually allow plans to be submitted over the Internet electronically.
    
    The community website can also save customers' time in other ways. Features can include access to all application forms, application guidelines and general public information. Access can also be made available to all relevant ordinances, regulations and interpretations. Other useful features can include lists of answers to most frequently asked questions; list telephone numbers, fax numbers and email addresses of all functions and staff; agendas for meetings and minutes of meetings; access to a database showing the status for a specific permit, and similar data. The website should also include easy access to a comprehensive geographic information system. Such a system can show the General Plan, zoning, and property assessor's information for a specific property. It can also show other items of interest such as wetlands delineation, slopes, etc.

  • Telephone/Voice Mail
    The telephone can also be a major time saver for the applicant. Why should a customer need to drive to a government building in order to have a question answered when it could be done over the telephone? Yet, many organizations have such a backlog of telephone calls that customers will drive to the office out of frustration, often, only to find an equally long wait at the office. We believe the office should have adequate telephone lines so the customer does not get a busy signal and they should be adequately staffed. The best current technology tells the caller how long the wait will be for a person and then gives the option to leave a phone number to be called back in the same order as called.
    
    Contemporary phone systems also emphasize direct phone lines for all employees. While only a few numbers will be listed for general public information, once a customer is working with a staff person, direct phone calls should be used. This saves operator time and frustration for the customer. The direct phone numbers should be listed on the employees business card as well as on the website.
    
    Employees need to be encouraged to answer their phone during major parts of the day. Some non-access time is appropriate for concentrated work time but this should not be abused. When the phone is not answered, the call should go into voicemail. However, in all cases there needs to be a feature where the caller can proceed to a live operator or other staff member. If the employee is going to be out of the office or on vacation, the message on the voicemail message should indicate such.
    
    The biggest complaint I receive concerning phone systems is that phone calls are not returned or not returned on a timely basis. Many communities have adopted a 24-hour rule, asking all staff to return phone call within 24 hours. I have not found these systems effective. First of all, in today's fast moving times, customers expect faster service. Secondly, these systems are hard to monitor and enforce. I favor a system that requires all phone calls and voice mails to be returned the day received. In other words, no staff goes home at night until they have returned all their phone calls.

  • FAX
    Although the fax is gradually being replaced by the Internet, it continues to be an important part of customer service for people without Internet access and to forward documents that are not in Internet format. The office should be willing to accept applications and other items by fax and also distribute various documents by fax.

  • Office Visits
    Some transactions will continue to require an office visit. In these cases the customer will expect and deserve, at a minimum, service that is similar to that expected in the market place. Two options here include having an appointment for service or simply coming in and waiting for service.
    
    I believe that in most cases appointments should be available within a few days or no later than a week. For people with appointments, they should expect to be serviced within five to ten minutes of showing up for the appointment.
    Waiting time for people without appointments can be a more difficult matter to handle. For small and low volume communities, customers expect and often receive almost instantaneous service. For larger and high volume communities the issue can become more complex. I like to target service 90% to 95% of the customers within 15 to 20 minutes and certainly no longer than 45 minutes. Four- and five-hour waits are unheard of, even in notoriously long-wait functions like departments of motor vehicles or hospital emergency rooms.

In Summary:

• The process should be a process, not a growth policy.
• The process should be a partnership between the applicant, government and citizens.
• The process should be customer-focused and easily understood by all customers, whether a homeowner, a builder, a community member or a policy maker.
• While staff has certain regulatory roles, the emphasis should be on problem solving for both the applicant and citizens while always focusing on building a better community.
• A poor development permitting process can result in higher end-product costs, decreased development quality, impact on citizens quality of life and lost business for both new and existing businesses.
• The community's economic development strategy and redevelopment strategy should be recognized as direct public policy deserving special attention and priority in the development permitting process.

This theme will be continued in the September Management Information email which will cover specific permit issues.

Paul Zucker (AKA the Management Doctor).

to top

July 2004 - Bad Bosses - You?

In my organizational development consulting, I continually come across "bad bosses." These are not bad planners or bad people, but they do need to learn how to be a boss. Recent studies indicate that the number-one reason people leave a job is because of bad supervisors or bosses. High on the list of why bosses are bad is poor communication skills. Check yourself in relation to the following points.

1. Being a Better Listener
   Are you really listening to employees? Most bosses say they have an open-door policy but don't really listen when employees come through the door. Or they practice management by walking around but don't listen then either.
2. Make Time for Employees
   When an employee can't get time with the boss, the organization is likely in trouble. If you have employees lined up outside your door, you have a problem. Show your employees they have your full attention. Talk about their career paths and how they will be growing in the organization.
3. Get The Word Out
   Get the word out ASAP of any changes affecting any employee.
4. Message on Values
   Don't send mixed messages. Know your values and communicate them frequently and consistently.
5. Regular Feedback
   Don't wait for an annual employee evaluation. Confront any employee problem promptly. Also, don't forget the positive feedback.
6. Speaking in Groups
   You need to have good skills to speak to groups of employees. I particularly see this problem in how the director handles staff meetings. Typically they pontificate for 55 minutes and then wonder why no one contributes during those last five minutes.
7. E-Mails
   Don't hide behind your e-mails. E-Mails are an important tool but don't use them for delicate matters that require personal and emotional attention.
8. Feedback
   Work hard to get employee feedback. Ask and listen. Use techniques like employee surveys, formal evaluation feedback forms and try a formal 360-degree evaluation. You can get better, but first you need a clear perspective of how you are currently doing.

Thank you...great suggestions.

Terry Marpert
City of Redmond, WA

This is really great advice, and I have circulated the email to my colleagues at APA. I have seen this bad behavior in so many people, although I believe the city management and civil engineer professions have a monopoly on it.

Stuart Meck, FAICP
Senior Research Fellow
American Planning Association

to top

June 2004 - Storytelling

Because I make so many presentations, I periodically read articles on making good presentations. Many of these talk about the power of stories.

The American Management Association's Spring 2004 publication had an article by Lori L. Silverman called, Business Communication Through Storytelling. She provides some good ideas on how you can use storytelling in the work place. Following are some excerpted thoughts.

Storytelling can enable you to present strategic and operating information in an attention-grabbing manner, illustrate a key or complex point in an effective way and otherwise build department support for your perspective. To help you find good stories, she suggests these questions:

• When did you learn a universal truth about life?
• When did you experience a valuable life lesson?
• What situation has had a profound impact on the person you are today?
• How did you first overcome a significant fear?

Another way is to look outside yourself including:

• Timeless tales about the organization and its culture.
• Anecdotes shared by family, friends and colleagues.
• Current or historical events outlined in newspapers, magazines or online sources.
• Incidents from television or radio news programs.
• Ancient fables and fairytales.

No matter where you obtain stories, you will need to hone them for use. There are three main parts to crafting stories to gain maximum impact. First, set the stage by introducing the cast of characters and describing pertinent elements such as the location, time of year, weather, geography and what is going on in the situation. Next, outline the obstacle, the challenge or the conflict and build to a climax. Finally, bring the story to closure by describing how the situation is resolved and by moving listeners to its meaning. Bringing the meaning of the story to listeners is accomplished by answering a question, "What's the point?" This is followed by a "call for action," that action being dependent on your organization's needs.

Send us your favorite story and we will share it with our readers.

to top

May 2004 - Leadership In A Time Of Stress

In today's government budget crisis, many planning directors or other directors are uncertain what to do. I was impressed by these 11 Keys to Leadership from the January 2004 Training Magazine.

"During such times, many senior leaders spend countless hours on ways to cut costs or jump-start revenues," says Joanne Sujansky, CEO of KEY-Group, a Pittsburgh-based consulting and training services company. "What they fail to realize is that if they don't have the necessary leadership skills to run their business and to implement the changes correctly, those countless hours will have been wasted."

Sujansky offers the following advice for today's leaders:

1. Stand by your team. People need to know you're in their corner. Support equals motivation. If they know they have your support, they will feel more motivated to do their jobs well.
2. Cultivate relationships. Take the time to get to know your team members. Meet with them one-on-one with no interruptions—you'll be amazed at what you find out. When people know you care, they'll be more inclined to work harder.
3. Acknowledge a job well done. It's important to let people know they make a difference. When people hear a compliment, they are more apt to repeat the behaviors that got them the compliment in the first place.
4. Set specific, challenging, yet attainable outcomes for team members. When you set specific goals from the beginning, you can avoid unnecessary surprises in the end. It allows your team to more easily check their progress and ensures that they know what your expectations are.
5. Practice what you preach. People want to know what you stand for, and they want to see that your values and beliefs guide you. Your team will learn more from what they see you do than from what you tell them.
6. Kill the grapevine. Rumors can wreak havoc in an organization. The key is to squelch rumors before they begin to spread, and you can do this by simply keeping your team informed. If everyone knows exactly what is going on, the chances for rumors to arise will decrease dramatically.
7. Network. Attend community events and industry conferences. You may think it's difficult to find good talent, but it is out there. It's just a matter of looking in all kinds of places.
8. If you see a problem, fix it. Whether it's a process, a way of thinking or a machine, if it is not working properly, fix it as soon as possible.
9. Do it now. Take a good, long look at your priorities. Many of the tasks and chores that dominate our time are urgent, but not necessarily important. Don't let the urgent drive out the important.
10. Schedule time for reading trade journals, business briefs, newspapers and books. As a leader, your team should see you as a resource. When you are informed, you can provide valuable information that will help them accomplish their goals. the more informed you are, the more informed your employees will be.
11. Be more, not less, available in times of change. When your organization is going through a change, you should limit meetings and other commitments that may take you away from your team. People need you most during these times. When they have questions, you need to be there with an answer.

Sounds like you're the next Dr. Phil. Did you ever think of going on Oprah's show? Good advice.

Charles Bien
U.S. Dept of Housing, Washington, DC

Gail O'Reilly
Borough of Red Bank, NJ

to top

April 2004 - "You're Fired"

Donald Trump's new program The Apprentice has led many to discuss again the topic of employee termination — you're fired. Rumor has it that Trump is even trying to get a trademark on the phrase. The real question is, when should someone be fired and is there a right way and wrong way to do it?

Do It

The first thing a manager needs to realize is that you do no service to a poor performing employee by not aggressively dealing with the situation. There is no such thing as a bad employee. What you may have are employees that simply don't fit. They are on a Northbound Train but they have South bound tickets. You need to help them find a South bound train. Using the book Good To Great terminology, they are on the wrong bus or in the wrong seats on the bus. Employees need to fit not only with the job but with the others in the organization and the organization's environment. The sooner they find the right train or bus, the better will be their career. You as the manager have a responsibility to help them see this.

I hear many governmental managers saying, "I'd like to fire them but I'm afraid I won't be able to find a replacement." However, this attitude can be destructive to the entire organization. Aubrey Daniels in an article on "Dumping Your Bad Employees," said, "If you'd terminate these employees under normal circumstances, you should terminate them under abnormal circumstances." There are many hidden costs of keeping problem workers. "Whatever you do, address the problem quickly."

How To Do It

You can't do it the way Trump does it on The Apprentice. Managers today need to be concerned about lawsuits, employees going postal, discrimination and reverse-discrimination. Stephen Covey says, "Unless there's a serious blind-siding character and/or competence flaw, people will almost always fire themselves when two things are present: first, an upfront, win-win agreement regarding expectations; and second, frequent feedback to the individual." We covered the same point in a previous Management Doctor question. Click here to read Terminating Employees.

to top

March 2004 - 8 Ways Micro-Managers Can Cure Themselves

In our consulting practice we continually find many planning and building managers who are micromanagers. This works against all the motivation and employee empowerment programs we have been teaching. Given this finding, I found the article below of particular interest.

Paul Zucker
Zucker Systems

Jeff Wuorio is an award-winning writer and columnist, and is the author of "The CNBC Guide to Money and Markets." For more information, click here to view his website.

You have a great team in place. From top to bottom, they're consistent, diligent and motivated. But there's one catch: No matter how well they perform time after time, you simply can't leave them alone to do what they already know how to do exceedingly well.

Call it micro-management, call it meddling, but a boss who can't or won't allow his staffers to function on their own can be a crippling handicap. Not only can that meddling strangle morale, it may send those who find it especially intrusive scrambling for another employer.

But it's a new day, and that can mean a new you as well. Here are eight strategies to break the micro-management habit.

• Understand why you're doing it. Take a few minutes of introspection and think about the reasons why you can't leave your people alone. That itself may hint at a solution. It may be that, deep down, you don't trust your staff or perhaps yourself (an insecure boss can't stay out of the loop for long). "It's not mistrust," says Los Angeles-based consultant Paul Glen. "It's a lack of belief that they, or you, can do what needs to be done."
• Redefine your role. One of the biggest causes of needless micro-management is a boss who really doesn't recognize what she's paid to do—particularly if she came up through the ranks of the company. "When you're not a manager, what you produce is your value to the company," says Glen. "When you move into management, you're rewarded for making other people more productive rather than producing yourself. You need to redefine that measure of success so you don't get involved in production anymore."
• Remember the micro-manager from Hades. Just about all of us in our working lives have endured a boss whose fingers were in every pie. Recall what that felt like, the lack of respect it conveyed, the oppressive weight of feeling, as though you were always being watched. That should pinch off many an urge by you to stick your nose where it's not really needed.
• Experience is everything. Another cause of harmful micro-management is a boss who's never savored the opposite: putting your people on autopilot and watching them rock. Consider earmarking a specific project that you swear a blood oath to ignore for the time being. Then, see how things come out. If your staff performs as expected, that can inject needed confidence in you to cut back on involvement, so having tangible proof may not be necessary.
• Spare the rod, spoil the boss. It's unfortunate, but sometimes you may have to discipline an employee who keeps making the same mistake. That means you as well. Bette Price, co-author of the book "True Leaders," says that doing so can solidify your visible commitment to break the habit of pointless meddling. "Once the manager has turned decisions over to the team, and if she gets back involved in the process, then a fine is assessed. The point being, the manager fesses up in a visible way for not following through with his own plan. This helps to convey to the team accountability and it helps to reinforce to the manager the habit that needs to be broken," Price says.
• Understand the distinction between helpful and meddlesome. Trying to get the micro-management monkey off your back doesn't mean abrogating all contact. As the person in charge, it's imperative that you know how things are progressing. But knowing what's going on is not the same as riding shotgun on every picayune decision. Stay informed, but separate those bits of information that warrant some response on your part from those that are purely "FYI."
• Take it in steps. One of the major stumbling blocks to many who resolve to be less meddlesome is their scope—the "I'm going to change me completely" pronouncement. Same with micro-managing. The boss who says she's simply going to stop, may be trying to take on more than can be reasonably addressed. Instead, resolve to make the change in steps. It may be one project, it may even be a particular day of the week, but tackling the problem of meddling can often be solved in small, progressive doses rather than a cold-turkey approach.
• "Boss, get out of my face." This last bit of advice depends in large part on you and the environment in which you work. If you genuinely want to stop needless micro-management, think seriously about giving your staff the freedom to let you know when a certain level of involvement may be too much. Again, this can be a matter of choice. Many employers would rather deal with the issue in a less visible manner. Others, in fact, may welcome the support that a public form of commitment can attract. "Tell them to tell you if they're feeling as though they're being micro-managed," Glen says. "If you tell them you're struggling, they'll probably try to help. And they'll appreciate what you're trying to do."

The other side of the coin is the phantom boss—the boss who's never there. Any thoughts on how to deal with these?

Signed,
Anonymous

• Ask What You Can Do To Help. Do you remember your staff asking for help and how you responded? Some micro-managers have difficulty responding to actual requests for help. Maybe because they are too busy responding to perceived needs. Unneeded and unrequited help can be redundant, dis-empowering, and confusing. Not responding to requests is dangerous too. Consider asking staff what you can do to help. This will foster a conversation and could provide an opportunity to not micro-manage.
• What Do You Gain? Micro-managing may allow you to say to your boss, "I had to tell her how to do it." But that doesn't reflect well on you since you should be able to coach staff to make appropriate choices. And forcing everything to be done your way discounts others' perspectives and styles, and prevents new ideas from coming into play.
• Is Micro-Managing Your Excuse For Not Making Decisions? Micro-managers often avoid actual decisions, timely or otherwise. They never have enough information, or the work wasn't done to their specifications.
• How About Micro-Managing Teamwork and Meetings? Micro-managing meetings and teamwork is also a no-no. If you always need the last word, want to restate what has been said or feel you need to say something (just because you are the manager?), think again. Once more, try asking what you could do to help and see what the group proposes.
• Think About Thank You. If you micro-manage, how do you ever say "thank you" to your staff? You might genuinely say thank you for typing but it is hard to sincerely say thank you for your work.

Signed,
Anonymous and Cringing!

to top

February 2004 - 10 Surefire Ways To Tick Off Your CoWorkers

Let's face it, not everyone gets along perfectly. To be successful in your work, you at least need the respect and support of others — your customers, suppliers, coworkers and management. But sometimes, despite your best efforts to win their support, bad habits creep into your daily work life and drive others crazy. Here are ten surefire ways to make sure your efforts to win their support don't backfire. If any sound familiar, you could be leaving your coworkers fuming.

1. Is it always all about you? Are you preoccupied with your own career path and looking good at the expense of others? Do you put others down while you pump yourself up? Instead, conduct yourself in such a way that other people will want to see you succeed — let their genuine support and admiration of who you are pull you to success.
2. Answering cell phone calls during meetings. A surefire way to aggravate people is to consistently respond to calls, emails and pagers when in conversation with others. This sends a message that they are less important than the caller. Let the calls go and return them when your current conversation is over. If you are expecting an urgent call, alert those present. They will appreciate that you value their time and that you stay focused on matters at hand.
3. Sending voicemails that go on and on and on. At the end of a voice message, replay it and hear how you sound. Difficulty in getting to the point? Just like giving a speech — state your objective or main message first and follow it with brief, supporting subpoints. Some people prefer voicemail, some email — each workplace has its own expectations.
4. Acting like a bureaucrat. Do you drag out turnaround times and play control games? Do you create obstacles or barriers for others to do their work? Making mountains out of molehills is another surefire way to alienate people. Teach people how to navigate your organization efficiently, knowing when to stick with the rules and when to break them.
5. Reading the newspaper or hammering on your laptop during training sessions or meetings. Yes, there are way too many meetings and you've got more important things to do. Yet doing non-relevant tasks when there is a set agenda sends a clear message that this event or these people are unimportant to you. Instead, be fully focused — chances are if you completely engage, you will make important contributions while you show you are a committed team player.
6. "I'm like, ya know . . ." You are your words even more so in virtual relationships. You may be communicating with people worldwide who know you only by the sound of your voice or the tone of your emails. Become conscious of how you use language and stop communicating in ways that cause you to sound inexperienced or unprofessional. Ask those you trust and respect for feedback.
7. Doing your bills at the office. Whether you are paying your bills, planning your wedding, or placing an online order for a special gift, avoid doing them on office time. People understand short personal calls and respect emergencies, but they don't appreciate seeing you get paid to manage your life.
8. Skirting around the dress code. Ask ten companies to define business casual and you have ten different definitions. Dressing for work has never been more complicated — especially if you work at multiple locations. Prioritize matching your customer's dress code and if visiting more than one on a given day and the codes conflict, go for a classic, neutral look and be prepared to be flexible — adding or losing a jacket or tie between locations.
9. Taking it too easy on telecommute days. Run a few errands and throw in a load of laundry? Hey, you're a hard worker and deserve work-life balance. Telecommuting can be a tremendous win-win but if you stretch it to its limits, you may blow the policy for yourself and others. Meet your deadlines, be readily available during business hours, and do great work — skip the temptation to make it appear like you are working but you're really not.
10. Acting unethically. Make sure you are clear on your organization's ethics policies and have the courage and conviction to uphold them. It's easy to draw the line on major violations but watch for the subtle ways you may be pulling others in the wrong direction to achieve goals — massaging numbers or data, violating copyright, or providing misleading information. Raise the ethics bar high and hold yourself and others to it.

to top

January 2004 - 10 Things Your Manager Wants You To Know

Business books have a lot on leadership but little on followership. A Google search for leadership turns up 19.8 million hits, for followership 15,400. So, what makes a good follower? A duty to speak up! One good follower said, "I'm the kind of person, if my boss is bad, I'm still going to make him look good." Entrepreneur and former executive Liz Ryan offers ten pieces of advice to followers from the perspective of a boss.

1. Don't take it personally when I'm abrupt. Bosses don't necessarily handle stress any better than anyone else does.
2. I can't make a federal case out of every issue that's important to you. When it comes to doing battle with my own boss or other departments, please let me pick my battles on your behalf.
3. I am not King Solomon. When you and a co-worker both want the desk next to the window, play rock-paper-scissors.
4. Don't give me a reason to watch you like a hawk.
5. You're the expert on how to do your job, not me. Don't be frustrated that I don't know the details. I have a different job description than you do.
6. When you're angry with me, let me know.
7. Don't ask me to tell you what I can't talk about. Are layoffs coming? I like you, but not enough to jeopardize my job.
8. Bring me problems as far in advance as possible. I can help you out of a jam if I have lead-time.
9. Give me feedback on my management style but be tactful and constructive.
10. I can help you if you goof up, but don't do anything really stupid.

Seeing the subject on your "10 Things Your Manager Wants You To Know" caught my eye, and I was prepared to send it to the team, but after reading, I think that only #1 and #9 applies to a good contemporary manager.

I would reword it this way:

1. It's my problem Don't take it personally when I'm abrupt. Bosses don't necessarily handle stress any better than anyone else does. But you should let me know that it's showing, because I should not take out my stress on you.
2. I'm here to make sure you have the resources to do your job well. If you are unable to get cooperation or resources from other departments, see me and let me use my channels to get them for you. I can't make a federal case out of every issue that's important to you. When it comes to doing battle with my own boss or other departments, please let me pick my battles on your behalf.
3. There are some issues that do not require management decisions. Figure out a way to make it work and let me know. I am not King Solomon. When you and a co-worker both want the desk next to the window, play rock-paper-scissors.
4. I trust you, that's why you're on the team. I'm here to help you achieve success, and you are able to achieve it independent of close supervision. Neither you nor I have the time for that level of observation. Don't give me a reason to watch you like a hawk.
5. You're the expert on how to do your job, not me. The work you do is part of the work for which I am responsible. I trust that you have the ability to work out the details and identify the needed resources. I'm here to be a sounding board and devil's advocate when you need it. You're better at doing those details than I am, so it's your job to know the details. Don't be frustrated that I don't know the details. I have a different job description than you do.
6. When you're angry with me, let me know, because it probably means I failed in my job to ensure you understood the issue and I failed to understand your view. Let's try it again.
7. Don't ask me to tell you what I can't talk about. Are layoffs coming? I like you, but not enough to jeopardize my job. In my position, some information is confidential. I will share everything I can, and ask that you understand that sometimes I cannot share all I know.
8. Bring me your challenges, problems as far in advance as if possible. I can help you out of a jam if I have lead-time. We'll do what can be done to get out of that jam.
9. Give me feedback on my management style but be tactful and constructive.
10. Take risks, learn from mistakes, understand what went wrong, and exercise the best judgment you can. I take responsibility for this department and stand between you and the mistake. I can help you if you goof up, but don't do anything really stupid.

The attitude of Ms. Levy is not for the contemporary planning office and successful manager.

From a Contemporary Manager

Hat's off for the changes. These I can share with staff.

Another Contemporary Manager Some of these ideas are definitely improvements on the original, but some are, to be blunt, modern PC crap. Number 6 for instance.

to top