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.

Who Gets to Decide?

“I don’t like to think about it,” Roselle explained, “but I keep thinking that maybe I’m the next one to get a pink slip.”

“I know, in these times, it is tempting for a company to save overhead costs, to lop off heavier management salaries. And some companies have no other choice,” I replied. “But in times like these, we will see more volatile change than normal, and there will be more management decisions to make in response to that change. Management decisions cannot be made without a manager.

“I don’t know about that. I have seen some boneheaded people making decisions in my day.”

“Of course you have. Sometimes we leave the wrong decisions to the wrong people. Some people make decisions through trial and error (in front of the customer). Some people are able to tap into their experience, or the experience of other people to see if we have ever solved that problem before. But I have to tell you, some problems you see today, have NOT been solved before. Those problems will require analysis, to get to the root cause before a decision can be made. It is those problems and those decisions which require a competent manager.”

What is the Work of a Manager?

What are the most important things you do in your role, as a manager? What is managerial work?

We answer emails, complete paperwork, sit through meetings, but when you strip away the fluff, the most important contribution we make, as managers, is to make decisions.

  • Who should be assigned?
  • How should something be done?
  • Which goal has greater priority, today, right now?
  • Are our methods effective?

Next Monday, February 22, Working Leadership Online kicks off our next Subject Area, Decision Making, Time Span of Discretion.

  • Learn three proven ways to make better decisions.
  • Understand this critical metric to determine who should be making which decisions.
  • Understand the balance between facts and intuition in the decision making process.

If this strikes a chord in you, as a manager, this is your opportunity. We’ve reserved fifty slots for our friends and family to participate, on us. If you would like to reserve your spot, follow this link –

Working Leadership Free Trial

Looking forward to meeting you online.

Last Step in Problem Solving

“Look at all the great ideas,” Marcy announced. Indeed, the list was impressive. Three flipchart pages worth. “We used the problem solving model.”

  • What is the problem?
  • What is the cause of the problem?
  • What are all the alternative solutions to the problem?

“It was really tough to suspend judgment during the meeting, but the ideas just flowed. Admittedly, some of the brainstorming came up with some really stupid solutions, but the team took parts of the stupid ideas and came up with several workable solutions. You should have seen the energy in the room.”

“So, tell me about the last step in the problem solving model?” I asked.

Marcy stopped. “The last step?”

“Yes, I see everyone high five-ing after the meeting, quite an upbeat mood, but if you don’t take the last step, nothing will happen and your meeting will have been wasted. I know you suspended judgment to come up with the ideas, but what are you going to do with that list?”

Marcy stared at the three pages. “Somewhere, in the pages of answers is the best solution, I know it.”

“What are you going to do?”

“The last step in the problem solving model is to pick the best solution. I guess I need to schedule another meeting.”

Get Disagreement Up Front

“Why can’t I just tell the team what they are supposed to do?” complained Aaron. “Why do I have to bring them into the meeting? I can figure out what we need to do much faster.”

“What happens if they disagree with your solution?” I ask.

“Well, that’s just tough. I’m the boss and I am supposed to be smarter than they are.”

“Aaron, have you ever had a team slow walk a job on you? Or worse, sandbag a job on you?” Aaron stopped. A blank stare came across his face. I could see this had happened more than once. He was just trying to decide which one he was going to tell me about.

I continued, “Aaron. You may be a smart guy. You might even have the right answer to solve the problem, but you need the cooperation of your team to execute that solution. The time for your team to have questions is before they get into the thick of things. Once you get rolling, if you have to stop to explain your thinking, it’s too late.

“So, let’s set up a meeting beforehand. Let them ask questions, let them challenge the solution. Let them grapple with the problem a bit and then agree on a course of action. Once everyone is in agreement, then we can roll forward, full steam ahead.”

Latitude in Decision Making

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
What is your opinion on the idea of forcing decision making downward. Do you think downward decision making is desirable?

Response:
It depends. There are a number of factors that will determine this direction. Ultimately, I will hold the manager responsible for the results of any decision that was made. This alone may guide you.

First factor is risk management. How much risk is associated with the result of the decision? If the decision is made poorly, how much damage can be done?

The second factor has to do with purpose. What is the purpose of driving the decision down a level? Is it a learning purpose? Is its purpose to obtain buy-in to the decision? Get clear on the purpose and that will help you determine the direction to move.

Determining whether a decision is appropriate for a team member to make, can be calibrated using Time Span. Time Span is often referred to as the Time Span of Discretion. Discretion is appropriate within the defined Time Span of the role. A machine operator with a defined Time Span in the role of one week, would be given the latitude of discretionary machine maintenance to determine when, within the week, in the midst of scheduled work, would be the best time to shut a machine down to complete that maintenance.

Best Way to Make a Decision

“Alright, let’s take a vote,” Ralph directed. I was sitting in the back of the room. I watched the hands go up in favor of Ralph’s plan. There was no dissent. Meeting adjourned.

Ralph was proud, no opposition, he picked up his stuff and strutted out of the room. And that’s when the truth came out. It started as a whisper, a snide remark, and then the piling on began. As it turned out, no one was in favor of Ralph’s plan.

“What do you mean?” Ralph said as I settled into his office.

“I don’t think your plan has a chance for success,” I replied. “As you left the room, I got to thinking, wondering if your plan had covered all the bases, in fact, if it was even the right decision.”

“But, everyone voted,” Ralph protested.

I nodded. “Do you think voting is the best way to make a decision?”

“Hey, it’s how we elect a president?”

I smiled and repeated, “Do you think voting is the best way to make a decision?”

“Well, do you have a better way?” Ralph challenged.

“I was just looking at your four alternatives. You know, there were two things that were absolute deal killers and the one you picked doesn’t meet the criteria.”

“What do you mean?”

“Think about it this way, Ralph. Put up a big chart on the wall and make a quick list of all the things that absolutely, positively have to be a part of the solution. Deal killers. Then make a list of all the things that are not absolute, but would be really nice to have. Now you have two lists, absolutes and desirables.

“Take your four alternatives and put them up against the criteria and see how things shake out.”

Ralph didn’t say a word. His eyes got wide. I could see him mentally checking his quick list. “I think I need to bring the team back in the room. I think they voted for a mistake.”

Concensus Kills

“I tried,” Adelle shrugged, “but we didn’t make a whole lot of progress. What we ended up with was mostly crap.”

“What do you mean?” I asked.

“My team has been trying to figure out the best way to solve this problem and there are a bunch of ideas, but we just can’t reach a consensus on which way to proceed. I am afraid to get started until I know for sure that everyone is on board. But every time we make a compromise, other people drop off and want something different.”

“Sounds like Congress,” I laughed. “What happens to the quality of the solution every time you compromise?”

“That’s the real problem. It’s the compromising that kills it. After listening to all the input, I know what we should do and the little compromises just water it down. We might as well junk the whole project because, in this state, it will not do what the customer wants it to do.”

“Whose meeting was that that you just walked out of?” I asked.

“What do you mean?”

“I mean, was it the team’s meeting, or was it your meeting? Let me put it a different way. Who is your boss going to hold accountable for this decision?”

“Oh, I tried that once, blaming a decision on the team. I got the message. My boss is going to hold me accountable for the decision.”

“Then, it wasn’t a team meeting. It was YOUR meeting that the team got invited to. It is your responsibility to listen to the input, and it is also your responsibility, as a manager, to make the decision. And you don’t need agreement, you just need support.”

Adelle had to sit down to think about this one.

Pay Banding

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
Can you expand on the “Time Span” “compensation banding” approach? I am not familiar with this concept and do not fully understand what is meant by either term.

Response:
Time Span is a recurring theme in this blog and in our leadership program (Working Leadership Online). Time Span is the cornerstone of the management research conducted by Elliott Jaques from the early 1950’s until his death in 2003. This research is documented in 26 books written during his lifetime and remains the most coherent and potent foundation for organizational design on the planet.

If you can see a goal, as a “what, by when,” then you can understand Time Span. Time Span is the time element in any goal statement. All behavior is goal-directed behavior, so Time Span touches everything we do. Most importantly, for managers, Time Span helps us understand the complexity of any goal. The longer the Time Span of the goal, the higher its complexity. The shorter the Time Span of the goal, less complexity.

We can also understand the complexity of any role in the organization by examination of their longest Time Span tasks (goals). The Time Span of the longest tasks in a role are a direct indicator of the complexity of the role. By calibrating the Time Span of the tasks in the roles inside your organization, you will be able to accurately identify and rank those roles according to complexity.

Pay banding looks at the those Time Spans and recognizes fair compensation. The longer the Time Span of the tasks (goals) in a role, the higher the compensation. Pay banding is a straightforward correlation of fair compensation for increasingly longer Time Span roles. Once you have determined fair compensation based on Time Span, discussions related to the value of roles can be put to rest and we can get back to work.

An in-depth explanation, along with defined pay bands can be found in Social Power and the CEO, on pages 55-56. If you have more questions, Ask Tom.

Unintended Consequences

I would like to collect a story from you.

There is a brew-ha-ha brewing over at Aubrey Daniels’ blog about such things as reward vs reinforcement vs motivation. This got started as Dan Pink’s Drive hit bookstores. Aubrey was puzzled over some of Pink’s observations.

“Contrary to what Pink asserts in his book, the surprising truth about what motivates us is that reinforcement always works, but not always as it is intended. The science of behavior has validated that fact in thousands of research studies over the last century. You don’t always get more of the behavior you reward, but you always get more of any behavior that is reinforced. That is true today and it was true thousands of years ago. If creative behavior is reinforced, you (the company, the person) will do more of it. Count on it. When work environments are properly arranged to produce positive reinforcers for highly productive, creative outcomes, they always do produce such outcomes.”

So, here is the story I would like to collect from you. What reward system have you tried in the past, that produced unintended consequences? Post your story at Ask Tom and then we can kick the can around.

Basis for Compensation

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
I learned today that my salary, as a manager of a department, is less than the people on my department team. My boss told me that adjustments will be made during my review. What is the best way to deal with this without feeling betrayed by my employer? I have been with the company fewer years, but promoted twice and my skills far exceed those on my team.

Response:
Your situation is not unusual. Most companies have only an intuitive idea about appropriate compensation and much less of an idea when asked to explain their compensation structure. Curing a compensation structure that is out of whack is quite difficult.

This is complicated by the fact that compensation gets wrapped up in the self concept of a person’s value. Not the case. Compensation must be based on the contribution of the role. The person may have higher capability and the potential to play a higher role, but it is the role that commands the compensation, not the person.

Elliott Jaques was quite specific and clear on the subject of compensation. He offers a simple basis for compensation banding with Time Span as the metric. Compensation, in Jaques model, is directly tied to the effective Time Span responsibilities in the role. And in your case, as a manager, your task assignments (goals) would necessarily have longer Time Spans associated. This would command a higher pay band than those on your team.

Your employer gets the benefit of the doubt on this one, acknowledging that an adjustment is appropriate. And it is likely to take some time to fix this systemic misunderstanding. And an even longer time for your boss to understand why.