When the leader is expected to manage and “do”
Whether it’s as a result of downsizing or a reluctance to staff adequately, some leaders are expected to act as an individual contributor as well as a manager of others.
The leaders with whom I have spoken universally dislike this assignment of responsibilities because it requires them to make a trade-off that is unpalatable. Inevitably, what they sacrifice is managing for “doing”.
It doesn’t take a graduate degree to figure out the result. The “doing” assignments get completed satisfactorily (particularly as the leader is usually an expert on the subject matter), and the managing gets as much attention as the leader can devote in between everything else. My informal survey indicates that leaders in this situation state that they can devote no more than half of their time to managing people. If they are lucky, they are blessed with highly competent staff who require little direction and feedback, although this generally is not the case. In very rare cases, senior management is aware of the impact of their decision to structure the leader’s life this way and will “cut them some slack”. However if they don’t, the resulting wear and tear on the leader is enormous.
So what can a leader do when faced with this predicament? The first place the leader should look for help is within, and ask the following tough questions:
“Am I doing the work because I am reluctant to delegate it? If so, why am I reluctant to delegate it?”
If the answer is that the leader is sensitive to the staff being overworked and thus is unwilling to delegate more work, then the remedy is re-prioritization of the department’s workload, combined with delegation of the leader’s assignments. Employees welcome being managed well and understand the need for the leader to delegate, even though they may be personally overwhelmed. In this situation it is best to involve the staff in re-assigning the work. If the leader lays out the case for delegation empathetically, she or he will generally find that the staff will accept the challenge of prioritizing and redistributing the work. (Probably not with relish, but at least with acceptance.) Of course, much of this acceptance depends upon the quality of the relationship between the manager and the staff.
If the answer to the question is that the leader prefers to do the work alone, then she or he should realistically assess the impact of that decision on both the manager and his or her staff. The leader should consider the effect it has on his or her own wellbeing and how this imbalance contributes to any physical, emotional or relationship strains. A stressed and overworked leader is a poor leader. She or he should also look at the effect a reluctance to delegate has on the staff. Does it result in less opportunities for employees to grow and be challenged? Does it keep her or him from learning about how to complete more technically challenging or strategic work?
Employees gain more empathy for their leader when they are exposed to the issues and dilemmas with which leaders have to grapple. In addition, it is organizationally unhealthy for leaders to carry all the pressures of department performance on their shoulders. It is both instructive and sobering for employees to, at a minimum, get a glimpse of life “above them”. It is also important for employees to share the pressure on performance lest they drift into their own version of complacency.
Have you ever been a leader faced with this situation? What was your experience?