Tag Archives: manager once removed

Who Needs to Be Fired Today?

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I am a manager, and I understand that I am accountable for the output of my team. My team is accountable for showing up every day with full commitment to do their best. But, I feel stymied by my colleagues, my manager and his colleagues. I know I am accountable, but my authority is constantly under pressure to keep members on my team who should have been terminated long ago. The trouble is, it’s so difficult to get rid of anybody around here. Yet, I am accountable for substandard output. My manager points to HR, HR points to policy, policy points back to me and my hands are tied.

Response:
It is not unusual for an organization to be fuzzy about hiring and firing practices. Upper management does not trust lower management to make sound decisions, and this lack of clarity creates a malaise of inaction that is allows underperformance to continue, simultaneously debilitating the morale of the rest of the team.

Elliott Jaques was quite clear that managerial accountability also requires managerial authority. Organizations underperform because this issue remains unresolved with managers, at all levels, passing the buck.

For a manager to be held accountable for the output of the team requires the manager to be given, minimum, veto authority in team member selection. Likewise, that same manager must have authority to de-select an individual from the team.

There are two implications. No manager can unilaterally make hiring and firing decisions in a vacuum. There are considerations of budget, work flow, work schedule, capacity. These circumstances create the context of the hiring and firing decisions. The second implication is the role of the manager-once-removed. The concern of upper management about the decision-making of lower management is not without merit, but, for Pete’s sake, get clear about the authority that goes with the accountability.

Manager-once-removed
——————–
Hiring manager
——————–
Team member

In hiring practice, the manager-once-removed is required to create a slate of qualified candidates for the hiring manager to select from. The manager-once-removed should be well aware of the context of the hire, including budget, work flow, work schedule and capacity planning. In this way, the manager-once-removed can be assured the hire is proper in context and that the hiring manager has a qualified slate to select from.

In firing practice, the manager-once-removed is required to be an active coach to the hiring (firing) manager. The hiring (firing) manager may de-select an individual from the team, but terminations from the company require the agreement from the manager-once-removed. Again, the manager-once-removed should be well aware of the context of the de-selection and/or termination related to budget, work flow, work schedule and capacity planning.

Most organizations leave this authority fuzzy and suffer the consequences. For a manager to be accountable for the output of the team, that manager must have the minimum veto authority on team selection and authority to de-select after due process.

So, why would the manager-once-removed want to get tangled up in this mess? Because the manager-once-removed is accountable for the output of the hiring manager. The manager-once-removed is accountable for the quality of the decision made by the hiring manager. This accountability changes everything, overnight.

How to Evaluate the Effectiveness of a Manager

1 Reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
First of all thank you for your help with understanding Elliott Jaques methodology. I am interested in applying it in one of the banks where I’m working currently.

Could you please advise a practical tool of installing a simple and reliable system of performance appraisal based upon the principle that it is the direct manager who is accountable for the results of his/her subordinates?

There is a good example in Social Power & the CEO of how to arrange personal effectiveness evaluation system of rank and file staff. However it does not say anything about how to evaluate managers.

Response:
The distinguishing factor between most performance appraisals and Jaques personal effectiveness appraisal is that it requires the manager to use judgement in considering all the factors surrounding a team member’s effectiveness. This requires the manager to look at ALL the variables surrounding output, only one of which is the team member’s performance.

Jaques uses the example of concrete pouring. In some companies, a performance appraisal considers only the output, how many yards of concrete were poured during an 8-hour shift. Irrespective of how direct labor shows up to work on time, uses their best effort to locate the truck properly and guide the concrete into the forms, the actual output may have more to do with the moisture content of the mix in the truck. Sometimes, travel time between the mixing plant and the pour site delivers a HOT batch, where the chemical setting up is already occurring before the truck even arrives at the site. Or the moisture content of the sand/rock mix may be too high and creates a slurry mix. All of these variables will have an impact on output in spite of the best efforts of the pouring crew.

A personal effectiveness appraisal requires the manager to take all those factors into account when asking the simple questions – Is the team member as effective as someone in the top half of the role or the bottom half? And in that half, top, middle or bottom?

Now, how to translate that to managerial roles? It’s the same.

The problem with managerial roles, is that we seldom define the work. What is the WORK of a manager?

Most managers receive no guidance related to the WORK of a manager. That is why the role description is so critical. But, most role descriptions are poorly organized, a list of non-sequitur tasks that provide no guidance to priority or objective.

An effective role description takes that list and groups the tasks that go together and separates the tasks that don’t go together. The tasks are now grouped into key areas (Key Result Areas – KRAs). The effective role description now clearly defines the output (goal, objective, accountability) in each KRA. The process is no different for a managerial role, but the KRAs are different and include a different level of work. Here are some typical managerial KRAs found in most managerial roles.

  • Team selection
  • Production system
  • Team training
  • Output planning
  • Quality control
  • Resource coordination (equipment, materials, tools)
  • Capital equipment budgets
  • Workforce planning

An effective role description will describe the required tasks/activities and state the accountability (output, goal, objective).

With this role description, in each KRA –
Is the manager as effective as someone in the top half of the role or the bottom half? And in that half, top, middle or bottom?

If you would like to receive by email, a template that organizes this review, just Ask Tom. A detailed discussion of KRAs in the role description can be found in Hiring Talent.

Should HR Be Involved in Terminations

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
Is it common practice for HR to be directly involved in the termination of an employee?

Response:
This question speaks to the larger role for HR in any organization. And, while some things may be common practice, common practice may often create problems.

It is an excellent idea to include HR in all processes related to de-selection and termination. There are several compliance issues related to continuance of health insurance, severance conditions and eligibility for unemployment compensation. Often these issues require specific documents and sequence that I do NOT expect managers to be expert on. Managers need to have a sound understanding, but I do not expect them to be expert.

I do not expect HR to be the “hatchet.” In the same way that managers are accountable for selection, they are also accountable for de-selection and termination.

In ALL cases, managers should be actively coached by their manager on all things related to the team. That active coaching is NOT an event, but a constant, scheduled conversation about workforce requirements, utilization, team capacity and individual capability within the team.

In the instance of termination, my rule is “two sets of eyes.” The manager and the manager-once-removed must agree on termination. A third set of eyes, from HR, is always a good idea to make sure the process is conducted within established guidelines.

Hiring Decision is Clouded by Urgency

Leave a reply

“But, it’s my decision,” Janice tried to explain. “How can you hold my manager accountable for my decision?”

“Who is your coach?” I asked.

Janice stopped cold. Her eyes briefly closed, fluttered. “My manager is my coach,” she replied.

“Prior to your last hire, did you write a role description?” I prompted.

“Well, I used one from HR. It’s an old one, but that was all they had.”

“And, what was your hiring criteria?”

“Well, I was a bit desperate, so I really needed someone who could start immediately,” Janice replied.

“And your coach, what was his hiring criteria?”

“Funny, after it was all over, he said he never would have hired the person I picked. He said the candidate wasn’t strong enough. He said I should have held up a higher standard for the position. Not to be so quick to make a decision.”

“And that’s why I hold your manager accountable for the quality of your decision. He is your coach. He sets the context for your decision. He is the quarterback for this hire. He knows what is really required for success in the role. You are concerned about production. He is concerned about building a stronger team.”

What’s Your Point?
Hiring managers are almost always under the gun to make a quick hire. There is a missing person on the team and the hiring manager is covering the work. Decision making is clouded by urgency. The hiring manager’s manager (the MOR) has clearer perspective on what is really required for success in the role. It is critical for the MOR to step up and be an active coach.

Managerial Acccountability Up the Food Chain

Leave a reply

“I understand, that, as a manager, I am accountable for the output of my team,” Janice was trying to make sense of who is accountable. “But my manager isn’t accountable for my output, is he? I thought it was only about our production teams.”

“As a manager, you are accountable for the output of your production team. You are accountable for their work output. Why shouldn’t your manager be accountable for your work output?” I asked.

“But, I don’t do production work, at least, not anymore,” she defended.

“Work is making decisions and solving problems. When your production team has a difficult decision to make or a difficult problem to solve, don’t you jump in and help them through?”

“Yes, because I am accountable for the team’s output. If I don’t help them make the right decision, I am on the hook for the consequence.”

“And you have told me that you are struggling, when it comes to hiring. You have a difficult decision to make. That’s work. What is the output of your decision making?” I prompted.

“It’s either going to be a good hire or a bad hire,” Janice relented.

“And why shouldn’t I hold your manager accountable for the quality of your decision?”

What’s Your Point?
Accountability is not just about production. Managerial accountability goes all they way up the food chain.

  • Supervisors (S-II) are accountable for the output of production.
  • Managers (S-III) are accountable for the output of supervisors (S-II).
  • Executive managers (S-IV) are accountable for the output of managers (S-III).
  • Business unit presidents (S-V) are accountable for the output of their executive managers (S-IV).

So, Easily Turned Away

Leave a reply

“There must be a trick to hiring,” Janice announced. “My manager always seems to find good people.”

“You feel your manager is better at hiring than you are?” I wanted to know.

“Better track record. He only hires one or two people a year, and they seem to stick. They are really smart, know how to do the job from the first day, they are confident, in control. How does he find these people?” she grimaced. “I’ve tried, I know how hard it is.”

“Have you ever asked him?”

“Yes,” Janice explained. “He just grins, says I will catch on, and then leaves me to twist in the wind.”

“Oh, really?”

“Once, just once, I wish he would take the time to help me. He just says, your team, your responsibility. But, he sees my struggle. He sees the turnover on my team.”

“So, you are so easily turned away?” I challenged.

“What?” Janice leaned back.

“You know, as a manager, that you are accountable for the output of your team. The same holds true for your manager. He is accountable for your output.”

What’s Your Point
When we understand that it is the manager accountable for the output of the team, everything changes. Janice’s manager is accountable for the quality of Janice’s decision, yet Janice is so easily turned away. This is a two way street. Janice needs help (we all need help and coaching makes us better) and she should actively seek that coaching from her manager.

“I need help. Here is the decision I am struggling with, and here are my two alternatives.” Powerful words.

How HR Can Help Resolve a Conflict

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
I have a question about how to resolve conflicts between a manager and a team member. Is this a role that is appropriate for hospitality HR consultants, or should the conflict be resolved by the MOR (Manager Once Removed)?

Response:
I am a big fan of the HR role. HR roles help bring discipline to all those functions that involve humans. And, many times, our problems are created by a lack of discipline.

  • Lack of discipline in the hiring process
  • Lack of discipline in context setting
  • Lack of discipline in the delegation process
  • Lack of discipline in the planning process
  • Lack of discipline in project reviews
  • Lack of discipline in effectiveness reviews

And, where HR can help in discipline, accountability still rests with the manager and the MOR.

You asked about a conflict between the manager and the team member. In all situations, I need more detail, but I assume most conflicts would be about work method or priority conflict. In some cases, there may be a conflict related to underperformance or misbehavior. In all cases, it is still the manager and the MOR who are accountable for resolving the conflict.

If the conflict is about work method or priority conflict, the team member is accountable for giving best advice. The manager is accountable to consider the advice and make an appropriate decision. If the two are still at loggerheads, the manager should seek advice and coaching from their manager (the MOR). Either manager can seek advice from the HR professional, but the manager and MOR are accountable for the decision and the consequence of that decision.

If the conflict is about underperformance or misbehavior, the discussion is different, but the accountability is the same. Elliott Jaques always traced underperformance or misbehavior to one of these four absolutes –

  • Capability
  • Skill (technical knowledge and practice)
  • Interest or passion for the work, value for the work
  • Required behaviors (contracted behaviors, habits or culture)

Elliott would also expect the manager to know which of these four absolutes contributed to the underperformance or misbehavior. The underlying cause might lead to more training, coaching or de-selection.

No matter the resolution, while HR can assist in the discipline of the process, the accountability remains with the manager and the MOR.

That Would Be Me

Leave a reply

Hiring Talent Summer Camp is coming. Registration and Orientation is now open. Register here. Vistage/TEC members get a $100 credit.
____________

“But, it’s an open role on Derrick’s team. I am not trying to argue, just trying to understand why, as Derrick’s manager, I am accountable for quarterbacking this recruiting process?” Roy continued to push back.

____________S-III – Manager (Roy)
________S-II – Supervisor (Derrick)
____S-I – Technician Team (Open role)

“Derrick is about to make a decision,” I explained. “As hiring manager, he has to have minimum veto authority over who gets on his team. This decision he is about to make could be a great decision or a poor decision. Whichever way he decides, who do I hold accountable for the quality of his decision?”

“Well, it is his decision. He must be accountable,” Roy continued to squirm.

“No. I assume Derrick is doing his very best and it is his manager I hold accountable for his output. Who is his manager?”

“That would be me,” Roy grimaced.

The People System

Leave a reply

Roy was still pushing back. “How can you hold me accountable for quarterbacking the hiring process for Derrick’s team? It’s his team. He is the supervisor.”

“Roy, let’s look at the levels of work in this hiring process. Starting with Stratum I level of work, that would be the technicians on Derrick’s team,” I described. “What is the team’s focus?”

“They run the machines, stack the materials, they do production,” Roy replied.

“And Derrick’s role is supervisor. What is his focus?”

“In his role as supervisor, he makes sure production gets done. He schedules the team, makes sure the materials are all there, makes sure the machines are in running order, makes sure the output of the team matches the work orders for each day.”

________Stratum II – Supervisor – Derrick
____ Stratum I – Technician Team

“What is the time frame of his focus?” I prompted.

Roy turned his head, “He has to look out, one to two weeks. Some of the materials take time to get. We can’t run out, that shuts production down.”

“What is the longest lead time item,” I asked.

“We have some materials, like custom packaging that can take as long as six months to get. If we run out of our custom packaging, that production cell would be shut down. That’s why we never run out.”

“And you. You are Derrick’s manager. What is your focus?”

____________ Stratum III – Manager – Roy
________ Stratum II – Supervisor – Derrick
____ Stratum I – Technician Team

“I have a longer term focus. I look at the system, the way everything works together,” Roy replied.

“Just looking at personnel, what do you focus on?”

“Well, Derrick may determine who shows up on any given day, but I determine how many people are on Derrick’s team, including new trainees, extra people to rotate in, when people are sick or workload goes up. Derrick may ask for an extra guy, but I decide if he gets it or not. I use production models based on historical data to determine the optimum size of the team given the forecast we get from the sales department.”

“So you are in charge of the people system?” I clarified.

“Yes, that’s right.”

“That’s why I hold you accountable for quarterbacking the recruiting process to fill a technician role on Derrick’s team.”
___________
Mark your calendars. Hiring Talent Summer Camp is coming. Registration and Orientation open today, July 6. Register here. Vistage/TEC members get a $100 credit.

Who Is the Quarterback of the Hiring Team?

Leave a reply

“I am Derrick’s manager, but Derrick is the one with the opening on his team, a position that has been open since April,” Roy protested. “How can you hold me accountable?”

“You are Derrick’s manager, I hold you accountable for his output,” I insisted.

“But he is the one who hasn’t done his job. He hasn’t hired anyone, not my fault,” Roy placed a line in the sand.

“He is on your team. One of your responsibilities is to decide who is on your team. Derrick is on your team. I hold you accountable. More than that, for this open role, you are the manager-once-removed. As the manager-once-removed, it is your responsibility to quarterback this hiring process.”

“Well. I have been telling him he needs to hire someone. What else am I supposed to do?” Roy grimaced.

“Derrick is the hiring manager, but you are the manager-once-removed. As the manager-once-removed, as the quarterback of this process, what steps could you have taken to make the situation better?”
___________
Mark your calendars. Hiring Talent Summer Camp is coming. Orientation starts July 6, pre-registration open now. Vistage/TEC members get a $100 credit.