Author Archives: Tom Foster

About Tom Foster

Tom Foster spends most of his time talking with managers and business owners. The conversations are about business lives and personal lives, goals, objectives and measuring performance. In short, transforming groups of people into teams working together. Sometimes we make great strides understanding this management stuff, other times it’s measured in very short inches. But in all of this conversation, there are things that we learn. This blog is that part of the conversation I can share. Often, the names are changed to protect the guilty, but this is real life inside of real companies.

Collins and Jaques

2 Replies

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

I have to set this up, because the source of this discussion began in January of this year. On this site, under Organizational Models, I listed a specific reference to Jim Collins and his take on organizational layers.

  • Level 5 – Level 5 Executive
  • Level 4 – Effective Leader
  • Level 3 – Competent Manager
  • Level 2 – Contributing Team Member
  • Level 1 – Highly Capable Individual

What makes this question special is that it was posed by Herb Koplowitz. Herb is a contributing editor to the Global Organization Design Society, a deep, international resource on organizational design, based in large part on the research of Elliott Jaques.

This is Part 1 of 5 in a series.

Question:
I didn’t read Collins’ levels as layers, but as personality fit to being a good manager. (He actually describes behaviors and then ascribes them to the manager as though ones manager has nothing to do with ones behavior.) Please explain how you see Collins’ levels as relating to Jaques’ strata. What is Stratum I about being a capable individual, what is Stratum II about being a contributing team member?

Response:
Since 2003, I have conducted more than 300 workshops for more than 3,500 CEOs, sharing the research of Elliott Jaques. By a show of hands, I always ask, who has any exposure to this research. Over the years, less than 100 have raised their hands.

“Next question,” I ask, “Who has read Good to Great, by Jim Collins?” Almost 100 percent have read, own a copy of the book and memorized that most famous bus analogy, right people, right seats.

I look at Collins, not because he is the best place to start, but because his book is a familiar touchstone in the room.

I didn’t piece some of this together until I was working with an independent school district in Detroit. Their organization, mildly different from manufacturing, held roles like superintendents, principals and teachers. There was interest to look at Requisite Organization to see how it might help in understanding the accountability and authority tied to each role.

And everyone in the room was familiar with Good to Great.

Collins provides a chart depicting his framework of Level Five Leadership. His focus in the book was on Level V, leaving us with only brief descriptions of the levels of work below. Rather than pick them apart, I looked for intersection, to see where Jaques could be instructive and helpful in understanding each level described by Collins.

Level V – Level V Leadership
Level IV – Effective Leader
Level III – Competent Manager
Level II – Contributing Team Member
Level I – Individual Contributor

Level 1 – Collins – Individual Contributor. When I think about the decisions at Stratum I (Requisite Organization), most of those decisions fall to pace and quality.

  • In my role, given my work instructions, am I working fast enough to complete the task within the time span allotted?
  • At that pace, is the output of my work within the quality standards set by my manager?

That is my accountability.

My authority is to adjust my work-pace and attention-to-quality to meet the task assignment. My authority is to judge whether I can meet the pace and quality set by my manager, and if not, then it is my accountability to tell my manager. It is all about me and my work, with the longest Time Span task assignments landing between one day and three months.

Tomorrow, we will look at Collins-Contributing Team Member and Jaques-Stratum II.

MOR on the Hook

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
We are a small organization and most of our production work is technical, defined at Stratum III. Because we are small, and I am the Hiring Manager, in a Stratum IV role, not sure how to implement the Manager-Once-Removed (MOR) in the hiring process?

Response:
The Manager Once Removed in the hiring process is a critical role.

  • Brings perspective and experience to defining the requirements of the role.
  • Truly understands the Level of Work required for success in the role.
  • Will not allow unqualified candidates into the process.
  • Will not allow the Hiring Manager to short-cut elements of the hiring process.
  • Is accountable for the quality of the hiring decision of the Hiring Manager.

Most MORs don’t take this accountability seriously, but this accountability is dead serious. I hold the MOR accountable for the quality of the decision of the Hiring Manager. This changes a number of things. The MOR is ON the hook.

But, where the Hiring Manager is playing a role in the highest layer of the company, who is the Manager Once Removed?

It’s not an insider, look around, there isn’t anyone. In this case, the answer is outside.

Every player needs a coach, including the person playing the role at the top. It’s either a mentor or most likely, a peer group. Most readers are somehow connected to a peer group organization called Vistage/TEC, when I present workshops to those groups, I say “Look to your right, look to your left, the MOR is sitting in this room.”

The dynamic is different. Outsiders cannot be held accountable for decisions made on the inside. But if there is NO ONE in the role on the inside, my next move is to personal mentor or peer group.

It’s a Cakewalk

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I just read your latest newsletter regarding team interviewing. I am a lousy interviewer but trying to get better. I am intrigued by the 50-60 interview questions that need to be prepared as I have a tendency to just wing it.

Do you have a source or listing of that many questions? I’m having a hard time envisioning what a comprehensive list might look like.

Response:
When I first introduce this concept of 50-60 written prepared questions, most interviewers freak out. Looks like a lot of work. No idea where to start? Can I short-cut the work and find the questions online?

The answer is, there is no short-cut. I do NOT have a list you can copy. But, here is the source of the questions.

The template I use to create a Role Description is organized around Key Result Areas (KRAs). When you look at any role, there are tasks that go together, typically related to a single goal or objective. In any role, there are typically 5-8 major goals or objectives, with related tasks in each goal area.

Looks like this –

Role Description
KRA #1
Tasks/Activities
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
Accountability
_____________________
KRA #2
Tasks/Activities
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
Accountability
_____________________
KRA #3
Tasks/Activities
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
Accountability
_____________________
and so on…

Use the Role Description to craft ten questions in each KRA. If you have six KRAs, you will have 60 written prepared questions. It’s a cakewalk.

If you have more questions, register for our Hiring Talent program, next Orientation is Apr 23, 2012. For more information, follow this link.

Getting By and Paying the Price

Leave a reply

“I know we are missing a couple of Managers,” admitted Derrick. “We intentionally allowed these positions to be open. We thought we could get by, save some salaries. We thought other people could cover for a short time.”

“And now you are paying the price,” I responded.

“I guess we thought our systems were solid,” Derrick hopefully floated.

“Perhaps they were, but things change. Your systems have to be constantly monitored, constantly tweaked. Other people can cover some of the daily work in your manager roles, but they are not going to look at your systems. Not only did you lose the predictability of your momentum, but glitches in your system cost you backtracking to re-locate the source of the problem. That’s why you felt, at times, that you were playing Whack-a-mole.”

“So, what’s the next step?” asked Derrick.

“Two-fold. You have to keep a handle on the Whack-a-mole and you also need to find a new manager.”

Problem Fixed, System Broken

Leave a reply

“You have two out of five manager positions in place on a daily basis, so when you have a problem, you fix the problem, but not the system,” I offered.

“So, the problem is fixed,” Derrick insisted.

“Yes, the problem is fixed, but the system is still broken. You are missing three of five Managers, so you are not paying proper attention to your systems.

“You see, Derrick, when you have a problem, everyone scrambles to fix the problem. Even experienced Managers put on their superhero cape and leap in front of their biggest customer to save the day.

“What your managers need to focus on,” I continued, “is the system. Why didn’t the system prevent that problem? Or at least mitigate the damage from the problem? Their role is to fix the system.”

Not a What, But a Who

Leave a reply

Derrick located a copy of the org chart. “A little out of date,” he remarked.

“It’s time stamped only three weeks ago,” I said.

“Yeah, well, it’s still out of date.”

“So, if I think you have a system problem, where should I look on the org chart?” I asked.

“All these people are doing production, and the supervisors make sure production gets done. You have to be looking at our managers, they create our systems, monitor and improve our systems,” Derrick observed.

“Yes, and I see you have five manager positions. These are the roles accountable for your systems.”

“That’s why it’s a little out of date. One manager got promoted to Vice President and we figured he could still cover his old position. This manager, here, got an offer from another company, and we decided that we might be able to do without for a while. And our controller wanted to move to the northern part of the state. And with the internet, she does her work from home.”

“Let me get this straight. You have five manager positions, monitoring your systems, yet only two out of five actually show up for work here?”

Predictability and Uncertainty

1 Reply

“I understand how we calculate profit, but what does that have to do with my organizational chart?” Derrick asked.

“You design a predictable profit into your price, but what is it that keeps your profit predictable when you actually deliver your product or service?” I replied.

Derrick was thinking. “It becomes predictable when we are able to do the same thing over and over, the same way, with the same methods, in the same amount of time, with the same amount of scrap.”

“And how do you make all that happen over and over?”

“Well, we have designed a system and we train everyone to work the system.”

“And so, if something is happening with the predictability of your profit, what’s wrong, where do you look?” I continued.

“Something has to be wrong with the system,” Derrick nodded.

“So, where do you look?” I insisted.

“We should try to find out what’s wrong with the system.”

“Remember, I said that your problem is seldom a what, almost always a who?”

Derrick grinned. “So, that’s why you want to look at the org chart.”

Curious Communication

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I have been reading your blog on the recommendation of one of the owners of my company. I am unsure of how to handle this situation. Our company has grown over the past few years and, with that growth, some roles have been re-structured, responsibilities shifted from one person to another. During this time, one of our critical business development processes appears to have shriveled from a lack of attention. It used to be a high priority, driven by the CEO, but now, it is hardly noticed, its momentum slowing to a standstill.

This has caused some concern in middle management, but we are unsure how to approach the CEO without causing controversy. We are not a bunch of whiners, but we think this is important. Somehow, somewhere, the ball got dropped.

Response:
Your question leads me to believe that your company culture doesn’t actively create open dialogue, that sometimes agendas, company and personal are driven with only half the story told. There is likely another side to this story. So, how to find this out “without causing controversy.”

Public or private, this conversation has to be held in a safe environment. In 1-1 conversations, I use the following phrase to set up the environment, “I am curious. -followed by the question-.” Curiosity is safe, keeps my agenda out of the explanation so I can truly hear the other side of the story.

A university chancellor, I work with, conducts frequent “brown bag” lunch sessions with students at his campus. The “brown bag” aspect removes the formality, and creates a more candid dialogue.

You might create a small “brown bag” affair, with an intimate group of “curious” managers and invite the CEO. One of my rules is “no surprises,” so the invitation should be clear to the CEO that you are there to find out the current Vision of the Business Development activities of the company. There is likely a reasonable explanation for this shift in focus.

You might find this “brown bag” affair becomes a regular event, once a month, once a quarter, and quite soon, will impact the culture of the company to promote this kind of curious communication.

The Forbidden Managerial Relationship?

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I attended one of your workshops last year and your email is my daily dose of wisdom. Is it the job of the Manager-Once-Removed to step in when he sees an employee’s manager making a mistake. Should the employee be able to go to the Manager-Once-Removed if they believe that their manager is incorrect?

Response:
Many companies are so afraid of undermining authority, that they forbid contact between the Manager-Once-Removed (MOR) and team members two strata below. This is actually a necessary managerial relationship. But it’s different.

Let’s tackle the first issue, this undermining authority business. The problem is in the way we frame our assumption. We assume the team member is accountable for their output under the authority of the Manager.

Stop. We missed where the accountability lies.

It is the Manager who is accountable for the output of the team member.

So, while the work of the Manager is to create work instructions for team members, it is also the work of the Manager to ensure those work instructions will be effective in reaching the goal, the task objective. It is imperative for the Manager to constantly ask questions, of the team members, about the effectiveness of the work instructions. It’s part of the role.

This same accountability works one strata above, as well. Who do I hold accountable for the Manager doing a good job of creating and testing work instructions? That would be the Manager-Once-Removed. So, it is incumbent on the MOR to visit the Manager, review work instructions, ask about the effectiveness of the work instructions in the reality of production.

It is also incumbent on the MOR to visit the production area and ask questions, because I hold the MOR accountable for the effectiveness of the Manager.

It is the role of both the MOR and Manager to bring value to the work, decision making and problem solving, of each team member. They are both accountable for the direct output of those team members one stratum below. This is done most effectively by asking questions and listening.

60 for 60

1 Reply

Rolled out of bed at 4:30 this morning, pulled on my burnt orange cycling jersey, filled my water bottles and headed into the darkness. Passed through the neutral zone and picked up Cary and Henrik, Danny joined us before 14th Street and we picked up Earle at A1A. Slight headwind going south to the turnaround, the four musketeers peeled off, I pressed on over the 17th Street bridge. The scenic loop through downtown was quiet.

Back on the beach, got picked up by a young group that cranked the speed up to 23. Held that all the way back to Hillsboro bridge. The second 20 miles done in 59 minutes. The boys had to go to work, so that left the last 20 solo up to Delray. Total time 3h27m.

What a great way to start the next decade.

April 21-22, 2012 is the MS-150 (150 miles over two days) to support the fight against MS. If you would like to support my ride, you can follow this link to the donation page.

My thanks to everyone for your support.