Respecting the style with which I usually write my articles, the content of the following work will talk about the author in the third person, even though the reflections and proposals presented here are my own and the product of my research in the administrative sciences.
After several years of interacting with base personnel, coordination, supervision and some levels of management, it is impossible to ignore one of the best known secrets of contemporary administration: Little more than 80% of the staff consider being under the supervision of an inept manager. Or what is worse, it seems to be an indispensable requirement to manage, in certain and certain companies, to know absolutely nothing about the business, administration and elementary aspects of dealing with staff to occupy such a relevant position.
Ineptitude should be understood as the lack of aptitude for a thing, the inability and incompetence, and even the display of foolishness or incapacity for a particular thing.
You are an inept manager when you are unable to accept your limitations (but you may know you have them), create a pleasant and inspiring environment on the job stage, and when, consciously or not, subordinates are induced to experience a feeling of rejection or disapproval.
With this expression it is not intended to offend anyone, it is a reality to which anyone is exposed, since the lack of capacity can be properly detected and corrected in most cases.
It is very difficult to deal with this subject without falling into subjectivity, in fact it would be contradictory not to do so because such statements come from the perception of the manager by his subordinates and, of course, the perception is not objective.
Sentencing an inept manager depends on many factors, but in some cases such statements seem to make sense, situations where the absence of practical and even theoretical knowledge of people who have the responsibility of running a business unit is evident, which, with an amazing skill, they make use of the handling of the operation presented by the team they supervise.
They are clear and obvious situations for those who experience and experience them, but they lack it (in an incomprehensible way) for the rest of the personnel who work in the company and especially for senior management.
It seems enough to ask anyone and observe that eight out of ten have complaints about the way they are managed and the same relationship is repeated when asked if their supervisor knows enough about the business or the work they do. Of course, in relation to the second option, this proportion does not apply in fast food chains or franchises where the fundamental requirement is to know the whole process well enough, but there does not seem to be the same trend, in this type of companies, when investigating about the first option.
It is not a secret, employees complain when they feel that the supervisor cannot hear them, they do it clandestinely in the bathrooms, stairs, dining rooms or in any space that provides them with some security to express openly and without censors what they think of their superior. Complaints range from simple contradictions to the psychological effect generated by knowing that you are being managed by a person who does not have the minimum skills to do so and who, on certain occasions, are below their supervisees.
Based on the expressions of the employees (regardless of their level of reporting) who experience this type of situation, where the manager seems to be a kind of traveling example of ineptitude, lacking that inspiring and shaping managerial capacity of those who must be leaders; You can list some of the reasons why such characteristics go unnoticed by senior management, these are:
They are valued because they are people with a long-standing relationship in the company: The length of time in the same position suggests that they fully manage and know it, and even more so if the operation flows without significant errors or they are not known to superior.
They are not objectively evaluated because they are related to the owner or influential people of the company: They are relatives, relatives or friends of a person of weight in the organization, recommended and sold as "good professionals" or are individuals who are owed favors or there is some "moral", sentimental, political or any other debt that requires them to be kept in those positions. They usually have some kind of experience involving assimilation of operations by contrast.
They are considered important because they are people with major degrees and recognitions: They have, in theory, everything that is required to manage a successful operation, their academic achievements precede them and therefore experience is taken for granted. Sometimes this situation is only presumed, since there is no evidence of the degree.
The opportunity to question them is lost because they are individuals with an important ability to speak: their incredible ability to convince the audience in situations of doubt or conflict and the proper handling of information, even when they do not understand it themselves, leads to the assumption of a level of proper involvement of suitable managers.
His superior is as much or more inept than he: When ignorance of the operation, the business or any practical or theoretical element is absent in the reporting levels, it is much more difficult to identify the existence of ineptitude since there are no grounds to oppose the approaches or actions that arise.
The existence of inept managers is a reality, there are them everywhere and, in most cases they show the same characteristics, some of them are:
They confuse the action of managing with that of governing: A capable manager is involved in the operation and looks for a way to facilitate the process by making use of teamwork, while the inept manager only demands solutions from his office setting times and specifying the content of the results without having the slightest idea of what you are asking for.
They are always busy and lacking in time: A good manager organizes and manages time, sets priorities and knows that not everything is urgent. He understands and values the needs of his team and is aware of the curve of mental and physical exhaustion of the staff and his own. For an inept manager, thirty-six hours are required, everything is urgent and “for yesterday”, it places the same sense of priority on all processes and is justified by pointing out that “this is the company”, requires three times as much effort He forces his staff to work without repairing over time, but when he has a commitment outside the work environment, he does not hesitate to retire.
They are confident to their staff but nervous to their supervisors: A fit manager knows his operation in detail and is able to defend his claims and positions with solid and irrefutable explanations. On the other hand, an inept manager shouts and shouts before his subordinates, making use of the power conferred by the position but hesitates, hesitates or remains silent when questioned by any superior.
They do not delegate functions, they depend on their people: Good managers know the operation, therefore, in an unexpected situation, they are able to take charge of any part of the process so that it does not stop. Inept managers are dedicated to justifying the absence of good results in situations where the personnel they have assigned for a particular task do not attend their tasks. He does not know how to keep the process flowing and he depends on his staff to keep it flowing.
They suffer from the “Anát Syndrome”: Good managers are concerned with finding ingenious solutions to problems in their area, they are open to listening to their staff and they publicly acknowledge the authorship of the contributions they make to their management. An inept manager sells the ideas his staff has suggested to him as his own. In some cases they ask that the proposal or the development of a work in electronic format be sent to them and, after some small modifications, they present them to their superiors as if it were the result of their effort.
They are flatterers, serviles and exhibitionists with their bosses: A suitable manager does not need to promote himself within the company, the quality of his results and the good atmosphere produced by his management are important enough elements to be valued and considered by those who supervise him. But in the case of inept managers, the same does not happen, they always echo what they do, highlighting only what they consider valuable in the eyes of their bosses, whom they serve and please in a servile and unethical way, regardless the image that is forged before their subordinates. In front of their superiors they are tireless and dedicated, stating that if it were not for their "management style" the operation would not be a success, completely obviating the effort of their work team.
They suffer from the “Chronos Syndrome”: A capable manager will look for a way to make his people grow, while an inept manager will always be in search of limitations to prevent his staff from reaching him.
For them there is always a crisis: Good managers seek balance between the company and its staff, they know that only in this way can they reap good results. Inept managers consistently and repetitively tell their staff that things are going from bad to worse and therefore have to accept the conditions he places on them in the work environment, otherwise they would be risking their jobs. For them there is always a crisis that requires attention and care, being they the only ones capable of avoiding it.
He is stubborn and stubborn: A fit manager handles stress and emotional intelligence, listens to recommendations, and encourages creativity and innovation, while an inept manager is constantly stressed and grumpy, insists that things must be done as he wants. says and specifies the smallest of details, even when what you want to express is not reflected in your demands. He often uses expressions such as "try not to be creative."
It should be noted that the above is not true in all cases, there are inept managers whose typology is unique and particular, making it almost impossible to fit them into characteristics similar to those discussed, but whose impact on personnel generates the same ineptitude classification.
Now, and this is perhaps the most important thing, a manager may be inept for some things but show a unique and extraordinary ability for others, because otherwise his lack of skills would be so evident that it would not last long enough in the company to to classify them. Inept managers tend to be very skilled in the word, in setting up scenarios that favor them, in giving a good impression to people who do not know them or are not in their area and, even, in appearing to be real lights in the administrative field. They study and organize the expectations that their superiors have of them and manage to look good in front of them, regardless of the cost in human capital that this generates. In most cases they know their limitations, even if they do not accept them,so they use gadgets to align themselves with people who can offer solutions or ideas that they will later show as the fruit of their experience and reflections.
How does the presence of inept managers affect staff? It can be said that in many ways, but the main ones are the following:
They generate feelings of frustration: When an employee discovers that his experience and academic level come up against his supervisor, he soon experiences a deep feeling of frustration, this occurs because the individual strives to achieve university degrees and experience in different fields. thinking that this is the only way he will be able to grow and occupy positions of importance in companies, so a scenario where he is better prepared than his boss is contradictory. However, it may happen that even when the academic level separates them, it is the attitude and the evident style of the manager that generates frustration since there is no answer to the question, how could this inept person get to that position?
Reduces motivation: The individual loses motivation when the scenario in which he operates is contrary to his principles, values and the reasons that led him to occupy a position in it. A basic principle is that which establishes that the right people must be in the right places and this is contradicted when a person who is incapable of managing has that responsibility.
It produces loss of interest in work: It is simple, if an inept person is capable of occupying a large position in the company, why try?
However, and as it has been commented in previous works, the presence of inept managers can be useful according to the type of person who experiences it, this can be observed from two angles;
People with implosive pride: They will allow themselves to be consumed by feelings of frustration, demotivation and disinterest, leaving aside their expectations and dreams to accept without hesitation being managed by people who lack the elementary capacity to do so. They will limit themselves to expressing their anguishes, disagreements and opinions in safe places where such comments do not reach the ears of their bosses in order to guarantee their permanence at work.
People with explosive pride: They will strengthen their goals and objectives to achieve their dreams, they will fight not to be carried away by adverse feelings that prevent them from advancing in their development, they will observe the situation they experience as a passenger and will strive to highlight and demonstrate the optimal management of the operation, but they can do it in the same scenario will seek their participation in another.
Those who have the responsibility of running a company must maintain objectivity in doing so and seek the selection of truly trained personnel to occupy managerial positions; In some cases, the possession of inept managers in charge of an operation may work for some time, but sooner or later this will have negative consequences for the organization that may put its operations at risk.
It is a true fact that a good number of employees do not resign from the company but rather from the manager of their unit, which should be a point of reflection for everyone who owns staff and who knows, in some way, that they are not in a position to manage it.
This is one of the reasons why there are brain leaks and good employees in companies, people who decide to withdraw from strong and promising organizations due to the existence of an inept manager at the head of the area where they worked.
Sometimes what seems obvious can be simply an illusion or the consequence of the action of a paradigm that prevents us from seeing reality, so it is advisable to be attentive to the management style of the staff that is owned at those levels and pay attention to the environment and The turnover rates of these areas, then, a company may be losing human talent due to the exercise of an inept manager.
____________________
Félix Socorro has a Master in Management Sciences, mention Human Resources, Specialist in Management, mention Business Management, Bachelor of Administration mention Human Resources and Higher Technical University in Management, mention Business Management. He is an international speaker and facilitator of this and other management issues. Contact: [email protected]
The total or partial reproduction of this article is authorized as long as the source is indicated, the author is named and his e-mail is placed to be contacted by readers who have access to this material.
