Much has been said, but perhaps it can be specified. In quantitative terms, their presence is less, but their role has been significantly enriched in recent years. The competency profile of middle managers demands new hard and soft traits, for the sake of collective efficiency and also for everyone's satisfaction. The leadership must be continuously impregnated with new beliefs and values, which are in tune with a growing and responsible role of the workers of the 21st century. The bosses must make an effort of self-knowledge and self-awareness, and promote a climate of professional autothelia and confidence, in which the best in people is manifested, and the worst is neutralized. If the reader is interested, it may be worth taking another look at the evolution of the role of middle managers.
From the outset, we can agree that today's bosses must promote lifelong learning, and the emotional activation of their collaborators after the collective good. Their performance must be nourished by elements such as integrity, empathy and an ideal and edifying leadership, while continuing to contribute with their own tasks, to the effectiveness of the organization. Also, if they are good observers, their upward feedback can be especially helpful to the prosperity of the organization. All this, although it sounds indoctrinating, seems to be absolutely true; but the experts provide us with much more about it.
Twelve years ago, Tom Peters already said that middle managers, as we had known them, were on the way to extinction, so that attention to this group goes back many years; But, on the one hand, all the changes sought have not yet materialized, and, on the other, new needs have emerged, without our being sure that they have been well analyzed. Companies often lack reflection because little is thought, and when we think we often lack data, so we are not always aware of the new management needs. Certain judgments are made, but there are also reckless ones. Senior managers often talk a lot about the importance of people, but as, perhaps exaggerating, Tom Peters himself said recently in Madrid, “they almost always lie”. More than lyingI would say that some send hollow, abstract or gallery-directed messages; they don't really believe what they say. Middle managers - closer to ordinary workers - would be better positioned to give more meaning to the importance of people and be more consistent with this reality, although each company is unique and must be generalized with reservations.
As such, bosses maintain a direct, albeit sometimes unequal, relationship with workers ("knowledge workers" in many cases) and their desirable leadership role must be understood as supported by a good set of intrapersonal and interpersonal strengths, which one they never finish developing, even though they are extragenetic. However, the apparently orchestrated training actions to facilitate the ideal leadership at intermediate levels have not been generating satisfactory results.
Without a doubt, seminars or workshops can be improved –maybe making them more maieutic–, but they will never be enough. (If I may say so, don't expect much from e-learning, unless your production engineering undergoes a convenient metamorphosis or metempsychosis: there is a lack of teaching experts.) The real culture of the organization and the example of authenticity of the Senior Management should serve as a solid reinforcement to the training actions that are programmed; and, of course, middle managers have to make a continuous effort of self-criticism and professional development. All people must do it; but in this group it is inexcusable. Let's say that, in the age of knowledge, the boss is not the one who knows the most; but it does have the keys to organizational synergy:the day-to-day alignment with the strategic objectives of the organization depends on the controls. The worker is absorbing part of the daily management that corresponded to the bosses, and assuming a growing responsibility and autonomy; But they face new challenges related to collective development, not to mention the growing interest in quality of life at work. (This interest, by the way, seems to be very justified, because really the work has often been too permeated with unnecessary negative emotions). Trying to specify, we would say that the new bosses, today's bosses (2004), correspond, among other more specific tasks:and assuming increasing responsibility and autonomy; But they face new challenges related to collective development, not to mention the growing interest in quality of life at work. (This interest, by the way, seems to be very justified, because really the work has often been too permeated with unnecessary negative emotions). Trying to specify, we would say that the new bosses, today's bosses (2004), correspond, among other more specific tasks:and assuming increasing responsibility and autonomy; But they face new challenges related to collective development, not to mention the growing interest in quality of life at work. (This interest, by the way, seems to be very justified, because really the work has often been too permeated with unnecessary negative emotions). Trying to specify, we would say that the new bosses, today's bosses (2004), correspond, among other more specific tasks:Trying to specify, we would say that the new bosses, today's bosses (2004), correspond, among other more specific tasks:Trying to specify, we would say that the new bosses, today's bosses (2004), correspond, among other more specific tasks:
- Take care of the daily alignment with the strategy and objectives of the company Ensure high performance in its area of influence Attend to permanent improvement and innovation Contribute to the flow of knowledge within the organization Promote positive emotions and neutralize negative ones in your area Generate synergies with other areas or departments Facilitate the development of your collaborators Promote the progress of technical, functional, cultural changes, etc. Solve problems and conflicts, but above all prevent them Cultivate, where appropriate, Shared aspirations and values Serve the outside world of the company Conveniently inform the Management.
This list of tasks is completed with some forgotten ones that the reader will remember, and also with those specific to each company and each assigned project. All of this after achieving results, customer satisfaction and that of the organization's members. But as important as the tasks, are the necessary skills in the profile of these managers. In an article published to me by the Spanish Association of Personnel Management (AEDIPE) in the emblematic year 2000, I drew the ideal boss (although at the time, I called him a leader):
“If we refine the profile of a good leader, we find competent and upright individuals, with exemplary behavior, who know themselves well, authentic, intuitive, capable of continual learning, good masters of their emotions, oriented towards achieving results, empathetic, optimistic, with a sense of humor, efficient, aware of the value and potential of their collaborators, receptive to them, creators of good performance teams, with clear ideas that they express well, persevering, self-confident, committed, with good capacity of analysis and synthesis, with a systemic conception of the company, interested in the development of their collaborators, capable of obtaining the best of them, willing to help them in their difficulties… For these individuals it is not difficult to find others to follow them ”.
I have reproduced this in the confidence that the reader will accept it, even if it still falls short. That article was titled “Leaders and Followers,” and in this regard it must be remembered that bosses are typically both at the same time. But they must be, above all, what unites, and does not separate, the Senior Management and the workers.
After 30 years in a great company, I think there was more separation than union, but we have already admitted that times are changing. By the way, Bennis said, back in the 80s, that trust was the emotional glue that united leaders and followers; It's okay to insist that middle managers nurture trust within the organization. It was not gratuitous that we spoke at the beginning of integrity, empathy…
Twenty competencies of today's boss
It would not do much to simplify it by saying that the boss must be a good manager and a good leader, especially since leadership continues to be something that lends itself to many readings and many styles. I, by the way, would bet on the servant leadership that Greenleaf nominated us 30 years ago, and that has been recently remembered by several authors; but, in each case, the type of leadership must be in tune with the culture of the organization. On the other hand, the list of competitions, even if we only talk about the ubiquitous soft competitions, can be very long. Let's try to identify, within these, the Top Twenty:
- Self-awareness and control Creativity and intuition Commitment and integrity Communication and empathy Autotelic conception of work Cultivation of positive emotions in the environment Care to neutralize negative ones Political and organizational awareness Courage and desire to achieve Ability analysis and synthesis Systemic conception of the company Collaboration and influence Concentration and mindfulness Catalysis of changes Ability and permanent attitude to learn Creation of functional synergies Construction when judging or formulating feedback Learning curiosity and serendipity Conciliation and flexibility Inner soul (negentropy) and outer energy.
Add five more, and excuse the license that I take to use the same initial letter –the C for Competition–; so I want to remember that there are many similar names for the same or similar competitions. But, tell me, do you think you can be a good manager without any of these skills? Isn't the ability to catalyze change essential? What about the ability to communicate successfully and effectively with others? Doesn't it seem inexcusable to feel committed and act with enough integrity, away from negligent or greedy corruption? Doesn't the manager have to be aware of the social and political currents that lie around him, in order to better perceive the realities? Is not the tandem negentropic calm and energy virtuous,versus the vicious of excessive tension and physical and mental fatigue? Were these traits taken into account when choosing bosses ten years ago? By what criteria were bosses chosen in previous decades? With what criteria are they chosen now?
With these?.
One more step
We have talked about collaboration and influence, but we seem to be avoiding the thorny issue of the exercise of authority. I have also avoided, I don't know if it is abstract or multiple, the concept of leadership. I no longer like leaders and followers very much, because it reminds me of the shepherd and his sheep; But I do believe in the need to harness the magic of positive emotions and also in the need to reduce negative ones. I believe that workers, as they take center stage and share the future, must also lead themselves; and that it is up to the boss to establish the microclimate and the conditions in which this is possible, always in accordance with the great corporate formulations, if they are authentic. It seems to me that an arrogant or conceited boss is becoming more and more ridiculous,not to mention narcissism (this occurs more at high levels). If you are responsible and effective, and contribute to collective effectiveness, you will be recognized for it and you should not go suspiciously about anything.
In this modest attempt to draw, with a few strokes, the best relationships between bosses and collaborators, I would add that discreet efficiency is, surely, what makes us more respectable in the company, regardless of the power we hold, and especially if it is we flaunt with ostentation. A moral authority of the bosses is postulated, so that their descent or influence works with some independence of the hierarchical position. Therefore, there is no room for gestures of power that, on the other hand, are ineffective or counterproductive; there are ways to be firm without being autocrats, and furthermore, power must be put at the service of the community and not of those who administer it. All this the experts say. It should not cost us to admit that the boss must control well his level of allegation, and place himself in an informative, assertive or persuasive zone,avoiding the dysfunctional zone of victory over the subordinate. Naturally, this style of command requires a certain profile in the collaborators; If this profile were not the ideal –which, nowadays, it does not usually–, it is up to the boss to adapt to the circumstances: each subordinate is unique and also shows differences at different times. So, in addition to being intuitive, the boss must be observant and empathetic, receptive and generous. I would also say that you should not practice recognition, praise, emotional approach, if you do not do it with authenticity and horizontality; but what else would you say about the new role of bosses?it is up to the boss to adapt to the circumstances: each subordinate is unique and also shows differences at different times. So, in addition to being intuitive, the boss must be observant and empathetic, receptive and generous. I would also say that you should not practice recognition, praise, emotional approach, if you do not do it with authenticity and horizontality; but what else would you say about the new role of bosses?it is up to the boss to adapt to the circumstances: each subordinate is unique and also shows differences at different times. So, in addition to being intuitive, the boss must be observant and empathetic, receptive and generous. I would also say that you should not practice recognition, praise, emotional approach, if you do not do it with authenticity and horizontality; but what else would you say about the new role of bosses?
