Heart of Management

Author: Heart of Management

  • Trust (renewed post)

    In the next few posts, we plan to write about several issues which, in our opinion, are the basis of management.

    Trust:

    We believe that trust is the baseline of every relationship, thus, trust is also the basis of every managerial relationship or leadership. It doesn’t matter whether you lead a single person (a one on one connection) or a team, trust is the first thing you’ll have to build and maintain.

    We usually make a distinction between different levels of trust:
    1. At the first level stands what we call “Personal trust”, this is the basic level of trust between two people. To achieve this level of trust, people usually should at least know each other enough so they understand in the most general terms, which common values they share and which they don’t agree upon. The best way to bring people to this level of trust is to make them spend some time together. A good way to speed up the process would be to facilitate a meeting with personal introductions and activities that will make each partner expose more information about himself (his personal life, his family, hobbies, beliefs etc.). The “Personal trust” is about knowing the other person/people on a personal level and being able to authentically respect at least some of his/her personal traits.

    2. At the second level stands what we call “Professional trust”; this is the belief that the other person is capable of performing the task at hand. The best way to build trust to this level is to give the involved parties an opportunity to watch the others perform their tasks. This usually requires some time, so that each one has the chance to witness the other performing and getting the job done several times. The “Professional trust” is about believing that the other person is capable of doing his job.

    3. The third level is what we call “Mutual goal trust” or “Mutual mission trust”, this is the belief that the other person is committed to the same goal or mission that we’re committed to, and even better, that we share our views on how to achieve this mutual goal. In order to reach this level of trust, the involved parties should spend time to agree upon and clarify both the mission and the path to get it.

    Often you’ll meet groups of people that didn’t go through all the above mentioned phases of trust. You might hear a sentence like “He’s a good guy but I’m not sure he’d be capable to help me” – achieved level one of trust but not level two. Or “I don’t trust this woman but she is surely a pro” – level two achieved while level one is missing.

    We sincerely believe that in order to get the best possible performance at any given task or mission, whether it’s you with your only subordinate, Joe, or a leader with many followers, one must go through all three levels of building trust.

    As a leader, you have to ensure the high level of trust between team members, that’s one of your most important tasks.

  • Renewal

    Blog renewal explanation

    Back in July 2011, I kicked off this blog, riding high on a wave of creativity and, let’s be honest, probably a bit too much free time. It was a brief adventure, fizzling out after just a month for reasons I couldn’t quite pin down at the time—was it the clock ticking too fast, my muse going on vacation, or something else entirely? Fast forward to now, and I’ve stumbled upon what I started back then. It felt like uncovering a time capsule, and it’s spurred me to jump back into blogging, but this time, I’m playing by different rules.

    I’ve decided to cut myself some slack. No more biting off more than I can chew with long posts that never see the light of day. Instead, I’m going for shorter, bite-sized pieces that feel more doable and less daunting. And the design? It’s going to be more fluid, less about sticking to a rigid format and more about letting the content shine—because that’s what really matters at the end of the day.

    In a nod to where it all began, I’m also revisiting the vault of 2011 posts. They’re like little snapshots of who I was back then, and I’m giving them a bit of a facelift and reintroducing them to the blog. It’s part nostalgia, part reflection, with a sprinkle of edits to add new perspectives or insights that I’ve gained over the years. It’s fascinating to see how much can change, and yet, how certain passions remain constant.

    Also, a big change is the shift from ‘I’ to ‘we/us’. This isn’t just my story anymore. Over the years, this blog has been touched by many hands—contributors who’ve added their magic and partners who’ve joined in on this crazy ride.

    So here’s to the new, relaxed, and more inclusive Heart of Man. We’re back, and we’re glad you’re here to join us on this revamped journey, complete with a look back as we march forward.

  • Responsibility and authority

    One of the most common
    things that junior managers find difficult is handling situations where their
    responsibility does not correspond directly with their authority.

    I’ll explain…

    In the past, usually
    managers were accounted for things that were directly in their line of
    authority. It was widely accepted that you can hold a person accountable for
    something, only if he has authority over it. This was tolerable in the highly
    hierarchical organizations of the past where changes both in the organization
    and the environment were minor, although occasionally you would encounter
    failures in situations where the responsibility for something was not well
    defined and things where falling “between the lines”.

    The situation nowadays
    is blurry. The business environment changes rapidly (see previous post here), this causes several things, among them: 1.
    Organizations become more and more complex. 2. It is almost impossible to
    define clear and rigid borders between different roles / positions. To cope
    with the rate of change a manager needs to be responsible and cope with many
    issues which couldn’t be defined in advance.

    It is obvious that even
    in the past the definition of responsibility for a certain position should have
    been broader then the authority, and that nowadays it is mandatory!

    So, how do you convey
    this “inconvenient truth” to a fresh, junior manager?

    Usually the conversion
    goes like this: Senior manager “Do you remember that situation? I think
    you should have done that…” Junior manager “How could have I done
    it? I am not responsible for that budget, I don’t have the resources required
    to take action”.

    Being through many

    versions of the above mentioned conversation, this is what I usually do in such
    situations:

    1. I
      start with self examination, trying to understand if I’m behaving as a good
      role model? How do I act in similar situations? Under no circumstances it is
      possible to convey such message if you are not up to it yourself! One other
      benefit I gain from this self examination is the gathering of examples of right
      and wrong from my own personal experience.
    2. Usually
      I explain rationally why it is mandatory that responsibility exceeds authority
      (see the three first paragraphs, or just make him or her read this post).
    3. Discuss
      the situation at hand and give examples of how I would have dealt with the
      situation given the lack of authority. I think that it is very useful to share
      situations from one’s own experience. Explain how I did act, what was good and
      what was wrong in the actions I’ve taken or avoided taking.

    I’ve started this post
    writing about junior mangers, but actually the problem is universal. The larger
    the manager you become, the larger the gap between your authority and
    responsibility. Making this distinction (i.e. that responsibility >
    authority) clear is not an easy task. As we develop and grow as mangers we are
    able to contains and stretch the gap between authority and responsibility. Or
    maybe it is the other way round, the more we are able to stretch the gap between
    the responsibility and authority the bigger the situations we can handle and
    the larger the mangers we become.

    That’s it for today,
    awaiting your comments.

    HoM

  • Values and integrity

    One definition of values is the belief of a person or a social group in which they have an emotional investment. This definition of values doesn’t include any reference to whether the values are “good” or “bad” (of course the perception if something is good or bad is subjective). Even a criminal has values (although they might be very different from the values an ordinary man withholds). When I talk about “values”, my definition is a little more specific. For me values indeed involve a deep emotional investment, but they also include an association with a code of conduct. My values dictate the way I believe I should behave in many situations. For instance, if one of my values is honesty, it immediately dictates that I’ll do whatever I can in order to tell the truth.

    My own private definition for integrity is how much one is committed to his own values. Again a little different from the dictionary where integrity stands for “moral soundness”. According to my definition if someone’s set of values include the value of honesty and he lies occasionally, it means that his integrity is questionable.

    Having a high level of integrity is critical when leading people for these reasons:

    1. If you and the people you lead share the same values, then following you when you stand up for those values is much easier for your followers.

    2. Even if you don’t share exactly the same values, following your values consistently will make your behaviors more understandable and predictable, thus increasing both self confidence and trust of the people you lead.

    Things become more complex when there is a conflict between different values you hold. For instance, if you hold the value of being polite and the value of honesty, a conflict between those two might arise (as often happens in many cultures). Such a dilemma can be solved if you are able to understand the importance of each value, which value is more important to you, which one is higher in the values hierarchy. A conflict I encountered a few times in the past month was the dilemma between being honest (i.e. telling the truth) and causing harm to someone not only by confronting him with some inconvenient criticism but also damaging his self confidence and self esteem when he really needed those. Such conflicts between different values are common in daily life as well as in many managerial situations. It is really important to be able to identify those conflicts and to consciously determine which action should be taken according to the situation and which value prevails in that situation. Being able to do so will keep your high level of integrity and will enable you to explain your decisions and actions even in the more complex situations you encounter.

    Expecting your comments,
    HoM

  • Giving Feedback

    One of the most useful and important tools a manager can have is the ability to give and receive feedback effectively. After gaining some practice in the process it can become a habit which you will be able to utilize effectively on many different occasions with many different people. For me, the time spent on giving or getting feedback was always most effective and significant in changing the way both me and the other person involved acted in the future.

    So, what is the most effective way to do it? How is it done?

    Well, I’m sure there are many ways to do it, here’s what works for me:

     

    Whenever it is to your colleague, your employee or your boss, the ability to give an effective feedback may sometimes make the difference between success and failure. Giving feedback requires you to first understand what message you want to convey to the other party? What do you want the outcome of the process to be? Like almost anything in life, you should start by asking yourself, what would the end result be like? Unlike many other issues in life, giving feedback at the wrong timing, without proper preparation and to someone who is not ready or cannot contain the feedback might bring the opposite results. I like to compare the process of giving feedback to playing with fire, done properly it is can be beautiful and exciting, one wrong move and you may burn yourself. We should bear in mind that giving feedback is a very sensitive process that should be handled carefully.

     

    The preparation phase:

     

    There are many reasons to give other person feedback. Doing it for the first time with someone may be very different from the next sessions in the future. I truly believe that the most important part of the process is the preparation phase. This is also the phase where I invest most of my time in the process.

     

    Start thinking about some good, positive things you think or feel about the person getting the feedback from you, and write them down. Those can be things you share in common, personal traits you admire in him or her or things you trust him or her to do. Write down how those things make you feel towards the other person, what it makes you think about him or her, how it makes you act in a different way. Try to think about examples in the past, write those down as well.  Starting with this positive feedback will build the other person’s confidence and will make it much easier for him or her to listen to the negative feedback.

     

    Next, start to phrase the subject of the feedback, the thing you are not satisfied with, the thing that bothers you and you want to change. The subject should be very specific, well defined and down to the point. It should describe the behaviors or opinions you wish the other party to change or improve. Write down and explain how it makes you feel, think and act towards the other person and the way it will affect you if it changes.

     

    Setting up the feedback meeting

     

    Speak directly (this can be done face to face or by making a phone call, avoid setting the meeting through Email or calendar without speaking with the other person first)  with the other person and tell him that you would like to set up a meeting to discuss  some issues which bother you. It is important to let the other person understand that the meeting is about things that bother you, and you want to change – you wouldn’t want him to be surprised during the feedback session. It is also important not to get into too many details; you wouldn’t want the feedback session to be conducted on the spot. If the other person insists on getting more details just say that you are not ready yet to discuss and prefer to wait for the meeting. Schedule the meeting in a quite, private area where both of you can talk face to face without distraction.

     

    The feedback session

     

    Thank the other person for coming to the meeting and then explain that you’ve prepared for the meeting. Start with going through the positive feedback, at the end of each point, ask the other person if he understands and agrees to it. Listen carefully and write down the important parts of what he said. After this is finished, start with the negative part of the feed back. After going through the explanation and the examples stop and ask the other person if he understood and what does he think and feel towards what you just said. Listen carefully and ask questions. A very important question is how you (the one giving the feedback) can help the other person fill in the gap described in the feedback. In this part of the discussion you are as responsible as the other side for finding a solution and closing the gap. It is of utmost importance that you conduct yourself with responsibility and open mindedness without accusing the other person. You should try to reach an understanding about actions you should both take in order to close the gap introduced in your feedback.

    Summarize the discussion and agree to meet again for a follow up, after a timeframe you both agree upon.

    Thank the other person again for coming to the meeting.

     

    Post feedback session

     

    Send the other person the summary of the things you agreed upon. Track your and his behaviors according to what you agreed. In due time, schedule the follow up session. During the follow up session, discuss what happened since your last meeting. Try to find out if any actions and decisions should be revised and decide whether you should meet again.

     

     

    One thing I keep reminding myself during the process is that whole process is that giving feedback to someone, is a gift, it gives the other party an opportunity to learn something about himself, something that he is usually not aware of. Done properly it will increases the level of confidence between me and the other person.

     

    Awaiting and anticipating your comments and feedbacks…

    Yours,

    HoM

  • Positive Attitude

    Positive attitude. Seems trivial. What’s more basic then that?

    Well, as trivial as it is, having the habit of holding a positive attitude, even in the most demanding situations is not that simple. I think that in order to do so, one has to understand clearly why it is so important.

    Your attitude is one of the first things people will notice about you.  I guess that most people won’t start to analyze rationally your attitude, but most of them will surely remain with some sort of first emotional impression about it.

    Even more important then this is the fact that usually other people’s reactions toward you, will, to some extent, reflect your attitude back to you. As simple as that, if you smile to somebody, he’ll usually smile back, if you whine to someone, he’ll usually immediately start to tell you about his troubles.

    The effect of having the right or wrong attitude is even stronger, in modern-day organizations with complex, multi-dimensional matrix organizational structures. Unlike past, simple hierarchical organizations, where people had the chance to know each other on a more intimate level, and get past first impressions, in the contemporary organization, you might interact with people for a very brief moment, and the first impression you made, the one that is largely affected by your attitude, might just be your last one.

    Once you understand how crucial it is to maintain the positive attitude, the question that remains is how to do it?

    Maybe the first thing to do is to understand your current present attitude. This can be done by asking people you know about it. You can ask people you trust and you think would be honest with you. It is important to also ask people with whom you might have some difficulties (I intend to write a post about feedback in the near future, and I’m going to elaborate some more on this subject).

    Once you understand your current attitude you’ll probably know which parts are your strengths and which are your shortcomings. I’ve found out that the increased awareness about those behaviors immediately make me increase the good, positive ones and decrease the bad, negative ones.

    Other things that work for me are:

    • Smiling a lot without giving up being honest.
    • Being optimistic by seeing the positive side of everything. When coming to think about this, almost nothing is totally bad or good, you can choose which side you want to emphasize!
    • Being empathic to others by really listening and understanding their point of view.

    Good luck, please let me know what you think, what works for you?

    HoM

  • Trust

     

    In the next few posts, I plan to write about several issues which are in my opinion, the basis of management.

    I believe that trust is the baseline of every relationship, thus, trust is also the basis of every managerial relationship or leadership . It doesn’t matter whether you lead a single person (a one on one connection) or a team, trust is the first thing you’ll have to build, and maintain.

    I usually make a distinction between different levels of trust:

    1. At the first level stands what I call “Personal trust”, this is the basic level of trust between two people. To achieve this level of trust, people usually should at least know each other enough, so they understand in the most general terms, which common values they share and which they don’t agree upon. The best way to bring people to this level of trust is to make them spend some time together. A good way to speed up the process would be to facilitate a meeting with personal introductions and activities that will make each partner expose more information about himself (his personal life, his family, hobbies, beliefs etc.).
    The “Personal trust” is about knowing the other person / people on a personal level and being able to authentically respect at least some of his / her personal traits.

    2. At the second level stands what I call “Professional trust”; this is the belief that the other person is capable of performing the task at hand. The best way to build trust to this level is to give the involved parties an opportunity to watch the others perform their tasks. This usually require some time, so that each one has the chance to witness the other performing and getting the job done several times.
    The “Professional trust” is about believing that the other person is capable of doing his job.

    3. The third level is what I call “Mutual goal trust” or “Mutual mission trust”, this is the belief that the other person is committed to the same goal or mission that I’m committed to, and even better, that we share our views on how to achieve this mutual goal. In order to reach this level of the trust the involved parties should spend time to agree upon and clarify both mission and the path to get it.

    Often you’ll meet groups of people that didn’t go through all the above mentioned phases of trust. You might hear a sentence like “He’s a good guy but I’m not sure he’d be capable to help me” – achieved level one of trust but not level two. Or “I don’t trust this guy but he is surely a pro” – level two achieved while level one is missing.

    I sincerely believe that in order to get the best possible performance at any given task or mission, whether it’s you with your only subordinate Joe, or a leader with many followers, one must go through all three levels of building trust.

    That’s it for today,
    HoM (that is “Heart of Management”)