Our model manager is Graham, whom we observed leading a small team of chemical engineers within a multinational European firm. The mission of the team’s NewPoly project was clear and meaningful enough: Develop a safe, biodegradable polymer to replace petrochemicals in cosmetics and, eventually, in a wide range of consumer products.
As in many large firms, however, the project was nested in a corporate setting of shifting top-management priorities, conflicting signals, and wavering commitments. Resources were uncomfortably tight, and uncertainty loomed over the project’s future — and every team member’s career.
Related: Why Managing Up Matters
Even worse, an incident early in the project, in which an important customer reacted angrily to a sample, left the team reeling. Yet Graham was able to sustain team members’ inner work lives by repeatedly and visibly removing obstacles, supporting progress, and emotionally supporting the team.
Graham’s management approach excelled in four ways.
1. He established a positive climate, one event at a time, which set behavioural norms for the team
When the customer complaint stopped the project in its tracks, for example, he engaged immediately with the team to analyse the problem, without recriminations, and develop a plan for repairing the relationship.
In doing so, he modelled how to respond to crises in the work: Not by panicking or pointing fingers but by identifying problems and their causes, and developing a coordinated action plan.
This is both a practical approach and a great way to give subordinates a sense of forward movement even in the face of the missteps and failures inherent in any complex project.
2. Graham stayed attuned to his team’s activities and progress
The non-judgemental climate he had established made this happen naturally. Team members updated him frequently — without being asked — on their setbacks, progress, and plans.
At one point, one of his hardest-working colleagues, Brady, had to abort a trial of a new material because he couldn’t get the parameters right on the equipment. It was bad news, because the NewPoly team had access to the equipment only one day a week, but Brady immediately informed Graham.
In his diary entry that evening, Brady noted, “He didn’t like the lost week but seemed to understand.” That understanding assured Graham’s place in the stream of information that would allow him to give his people just what they needed to make progress.
3. Graham targeted his support according to recent events in the team and the project
Each day, he could anticipate what type of intervention — a catalyst or the removal of an inhibitor; a nourisher or some antidote to a toxin — would have the most impact on team members’ inner work lives and progress. And if he could not make that judgement, he asked. Most days it was not hard to figure out, as on the day he received some uplifting news about his bosses’ commitment to the project.
Related: Accommodating Your Boss’s Work Style
He knew the team was jittery about a rumoured corporate reorganisation and could use the encouragement. Even though the clarification came during a well-earned vacation day, he immediately got on the phone to relay the good news to the team.
4. Graham established himself as a resource for team members, rather than a micro-manager; he checked in while never seeming to check up
Checking in and checking up seem quite similar, but micro-managers make four kinds of mistakes. First, they fail to allow autonomy in carrying out the work. Unlike Graham, who gave the NewPoly team a clear strategic goal but respected members’ ideas about how to meet it, micro-managers dictate every move. Second, they frequently ask subordinates about their work without providing any real help.
By contrast, when one of Graham’s team members reported problems, he helped analyse them — remaining open to alternative interpretations — and often helped to get things back on track.
Third, micro-managers are quick to affix personal blame when problems arise, leading subordinates to hide problems rather than honestly discuss how to surmount them, as Graham did with Brady. And fourth, micro-managers tend to hoard information to use as a secret weapon. Few realise how damaging this is to inner work life.
When subordinates perceive that a manager is withholding potentially useful information, their motivation wanes, and their work is handicapped. Graham was quick to communicate upper management’s views of the project, customers’ opinions and needs, and sources of assistance or resistance within and outside the organisation.
Related: 3 Steps to a High-Performance Culture
Effective managers establish themselves as resources, checking in on employees while never seeming to check up on them.
Graham sustained his team’s positive emotions, intrinsic motivation, and favourable perceptions. His actions serve as a powerful example of how managers can approach each day determined to foster progress.
Many managers, however well-intentioned, will find it hard to establish the habits that seemed to come so naturally to Graham. Awareness, is the first step. However, turning an awareness of the importance of inner work life into routine action takes discipline. With that in mind, we developed a checklist for managers to consult on a daily basis.
