Leadership and Communications

The art and practice of managing requires leadership and communication skills, a breadth of knowledge related to the position, proactive attitudes toward meeting goals and objectives, and personal characteristics that meet the requirements of the organization. We’ll consider leadership from the perspective of the newly appointed manager and not the organizational executive. Although the same fundamentals apply, the application of those fundamentals takes place at a very different level. We’ll consider communications from the perspective of what is being communicated. The entry-level manager is most likely not leading a department that’s looking at the next acquisition or merger or developing the organization’s cost reduction plan, and is probably not involved in high-level organizational decisions.

TAKING THE LEAD

The literature related to leadership is vast and full of contradictions. There are probably more than 200 different descriptions of this activity we refer to as leadership. The difficulty in arriving at a set of coherent and acceptable principles comes from the inability of researchers to capture in real time the actions and processes used by managers in leading their organizations.

The differences in people and circumstances create this dilemma. Most discussions on leadership consider leadership at the top political and executive levels. They relate to Winston Churchill’s and Franklin. D. Roosevelt’s leadership during World War II. They relate to Jack Welch as CEO of General Electric. They relate to Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., and the rebuilding of IBM. They relate to Dr. Martin Luther King’s leadership during the equal rights movement. They relate to the leadership of Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center. Leadership at the entry level is quite different. You’re not waging World War II. You’re not Carly Fiorina working to merge Hewlett Packard and Compaq into a single innovative organization. You’ll be managing the activities of probably no more than ten or fifteen people so your role as leader must be viewed from that perspective: a small department with specific objectives that require interaction with many other departments.

Look at leadership as taking the lead. That implies that your focus is both on today’s work and the future work to fulfill your department’s purposes and maintain its viability.

FROM RESEARCH ON LEADERSHIP

What does research tell us about leadership activities? A Center for Creative Leadership1 survey that included responses from 750 executives showed the following results:

❑ The majority of respondents (79 percent) consider developing leaders as one of the five most critical factors for developing competitive advantage.

❑ Executives (90 percent) are very or somewhat involved with leadership development.

❑ People skills were ranked the highest in importance, followed by personal characteristics, strategic management skills at upper levels, and process management skills.

❑ Personal characteristics rise with management level.

❑ Less than half (42 percent) have created or communicated a leadership strategy.

❑ Less than half (49 percent) have an HR program to support development of leadership skills.

These statistics are both encouraging and discouraging. Executives continually call out for more leadership. While 79 percent consider developing leaders as one of the five critical factors for developing competitive advantage, only 42 percent have created and communicated a leadership strategy and only 49 percent have an HR program to support development of leadership skills. Developing leadership skills involves more than sending people to a three-day course on how to make your employees feel good and at the same time meet the organization’s objectives. The missing element in most leadership programs involves defining leaders for what and where.

A study conducted at the University of Michigan in the mid-1980s showed that a continuum existed with managers focusing at high performance at one end and people-centered managers at the other end. However, the results showed that managers of high-performance work groups took considerable interest in their employees’ future. A performance-oriented leader would not necessarily have low people orientation.

A similar study conducted during the same time period at Ohio State University found that there were two continuums: a high-performance to low-performance continuum and a high people-orientation to low people orientation continuum. The leader’s behavior could fall on different ends of these continuums. In a follow-up study, agreement was reached by both groups of researchers to describe leaders in two dimensions: the performance and people dimensions. Being high-performance oriented did not necessarily mean low people orientation.

The research of Warren G. Bennis and Robert J. Thomas2 regarding general differences in leadership have found some commonalities based on generational considerations. They have classified leaders as Geezers and Geeks. They suggest that Geezers survived the Great Depression and World War II and sought stability, loyalty, and financial security. Geezers read the ‘‘great books,’’ and basically lead through the command and control techniques modeled after the heroic generals of World War II. They believe that the mailroom can be the start of a career that can lead to the boardroom. All it takes is hard work, dedication, and loyalty. Geeks grew up at a time of peace and plenty and seek a more balanced lifestyle. They were fed television programs on demand; doing school homework became a secondary issue; plagiarism from searching the Web grew at a rapid rate. Their parents were well educated, and many had two working parents, so they did not want for material things. The authors also note that Geeks are impatient to reach the boardroom, but with the demise of the dot-coms that attitude will quickly wane. The idea of offering bonuses to come to work has been replaced with finding a job that might offer some iota of security. Organizational loyalty is a questionable value and they seek monetary rewards. (Note: These statements are somewhat true and somewhat false. Populations are not subject to broad generalizations.) Bennis and Thomas found four competencies that are common to both generations:

1. Adaptation—the ability to adapt to circumstances with certain resilience regardless of the nature of those circumstances. Most organizations fail because they lack the ability to adapt to new environments.

2. Engagement—the ability to create shared meaning. The ability to motivate people to take risks and move forward. The ability to create cognitive dissonance.

3. Voice—understanding emotional intelligence and perspective. Treating people with dignity and respect. Knowing their possibilities and the limitations.

4. Integrity—maintaining a strong moral compass. Balancing ambition, competence, and ethical behavior.

The authors argue that both generations acquired their leadership skills through profound experiences that they call life-defining moments: Geezers lived through the Depression and World War II, and the Geeks had somewhat other, more diverse, defining moments. Edith Wharton3 provides a prescription for learning from those defining moments:

In spite of illness, in spite of the arch-enemy, sorrow, one can remain alive long past the usual date of disintegration if one is unafraid of change, insatiable in intellectual curiosity, interested in big things, and happy in small ways.

LEADERSHIP MODELS

While much of the research on leadership styles is inconclusive, it does follow some patterns. Edward E. Lawler III4 provides some insight that can help the newly appointed manager recognize the implications of style on leadership. Below table illustrates the relationship between a leader’s emphasis on performance and people orientation in a two-by-two matrix.

The two-by-two matrix is used for convenience purposes. The four styles include laissez-faire, authoritarian, human relations, and participative.

❑ Laissez-faire leaders are basically passive. Personal initiative and risk taking are not on the agenda. As a member of this group, don’t expect too much and your group will probably not be recognized as one of the top ten. It may be difficult to make a transfer from such a group. Leaders in this quadrant won’t have an impact on the organization. Status quo is good enough.

❑ Authoritarian leaders generally make important decisions without input from group members. This is not a viable approach when dealing with professionals—professionals being defined as anyone with specific critical skills. While the authoritarian approach may be required at times, it needs to be used judiciously. Some people respond only when threatened in some way. Most people object to being told what to do and how to do it. However, it may be necessary at times and we need to keep in mind that an authoritarian approach does allow for quick decisions.

❑ Human relations–type leaders go to the extreme focusing on people orientation. People orientation cannot be allowed to reach a point where performance requirements are not met and then rationalized. Rationalizing failure to mean success rather than nonperformance merely dumbs down the organization.

Human relations–oriented managers too often justify all nonperformance, thereby setting the stage for more serious problems.

❑ Participative leaders encourage input from group members. Participative leadership, sometimes referred to as democratic leadership, does provide an opportunity to involve members of a group. Bringing in the group to participate in the study and follow-up decision processes does generally motivate the group. However, leaders need to be cautious in carrying the approach too far. Leaders in this category often attempt to reach consensus on every issue; that’s an unrealistic approach if meeting the organization’s objectives are important.

Also, can the group take the time to satisfy everybody’s wishes? People need to practice the 80/20 rule; 80 percent of whatever is needed can be accomplished in the first 20 percent of the time. Keep in mind that the two-by-two matrix shown in above is for reference only. No manager functions in any one quadrant all the time.

Any matrix only provides gross classifications. If we divide each axis by ten we can gain a better appreciation of the matrix. Performance and people orientation do not just exist at low or high. There’s a range from low to high.

As a new manager you should strive to work in the participative quadrant. As the name implies, it’s participation that counts. It’s not about reaching consensus on every issue. It is about soliciting input from the staff. It’s about working with the people in your department in a collegial style, creating an environment where their work is challenging and where opportunities exist to develop successful careers that benefit the company and the employee. These same opportunities exist in a group doing routine and repetitive work. There is always the challenge for improving some aspect of how the work is performed.

Bruch and Ghoshal Model Research shows that only 10 percent of managers move a company forward. Such a figure would indicate that the malpractice of management requires attention. The research of Heike Bruch and Sumantra Ghoshal5 shows that managers squander 90 percent of their time in ineffective activities: only 10 percent of their time is spent in value-adding activities. The study further went on to show that 40 percent were distracted, 30 percent were procrastinators, 20 percent were disengaged, but only 10 percent were purposeful. Their ten-year study with a dozen large companies— including Sony, LGE Electronics, and Lufthansa—showed that too many managers are obsessed with e-mail, meeting mania, and meaningless communication instead of focusing on the real work: new products, new processes, new markets, competition, strategy, effectiveness and efficiency, and the future of the organization.

Bruch and Ghoshal classified managers they studied into four groups: the procrastinators, the disengaged, the distracted, and the purposeful.

❑ Procrastinators (30 percent of those studied) suffer from low levels of energy and focus. They dutifully perform assigned tasks but lack initiative or raise the level of performance.

Some just cannot get started while others for various reasons feel insecure about achieving the intended results. You probably know which of your professional peers are procrastinators.

The study also found that procrastination doesn’t totally depend on personality; it is influenced by organizational factors; formal structures with defined job requirements tend to increase the opportunities for procrastination while unstructured jobs tend to reduce the number of procrastinators.

❑ Disengaged managers (20 percent) are focused but with low levels of energy. This group is more complex. Some just don’t have the inner resources to energize themselves. Some feel that the work assigned is meaningless for them as well as the organization. These managers can also practice a form of denial: they can easily convince themselves that the problem doesn’t exist. Others often refuse to take action when needed: protecting their own kingdom takes the top priority. They can be exceedingly tense and are often plagued by anxiety, uncertainty, anger, frustration, and alienation. Organizational processes also affect the disengaged.

❑ Distracted managers (40 percent) are well intentioned and highly energetic, but they lack focus. Their mantra might be: Do something, no matter what, but do something. This is a group that equates motion with constructive action; don’t stop and reflect, just do something. They thrive on unproductive busyness. The functional silos breed the distracted manager. They tend to overcommit, become involved in too many projects, and spend most of their time fighting fires. These are the people for whom adding value means keeping people busy. These are the people who create the ‘‘make work.’’ The group of distracted managers grows when highly aggressive managers fail to adequately reflect on their actions.

❑ Purposeful managers (10 percent) are highly energetic and highly focused: They approach their work from a different perspective. The primary characteristic of purposeful managers is their ability to set the agenda. They extend their freedom to act, manage their bosses’ expectations, find ways to accumulate the resources, develop relationships with influential people, and systematically build their competencies to broaden their ability to act. They are not constrained by outside forces or influences such as bosses, other managers, job descriptions, or salaries. They basically define the work and manage the internal and external environment. They set the agenda. These managers put in more effort than their peers, are more aware of the global environment in which they work, select the battles in which they engage, welcome opportunities to pursue new goals, and fully understand the value of time. They make time to think.

FROM RESEARCH TO REALITY

Below table summarizes the issues related to taking the lead. Where you position yourself and what philosophy of management you adopt will determine what kind of manager you choose to be. Keep in mind that leadership is but one of three functions of the manager and it is not done in isolation. Managers will not set some specific time to lead. Leading takes place while performing those many administrative duties and while providing direction to the organization. Taking the lead involves being the pathfinder, the visionary, the coalition builder, the doer, the implementer, and means using your power to influence. You look to your staff for ideas but that doesn’t absolve you from injecting your own. You as manager set the direction.

A review of below table shows that effective managers are purposeful, as suggested by Bruch and Ghoshal. Can you conceive of yourself being in the procrastinator, disengaged, or distracted categories? Can you conceive of yourself in the laissez-faire, authoritarian, or human relations category suggested by Lawler? Isn’t participative management as suggested by Lawler (not democratic leadership), used within a framework seeking

Taking the Lead ·        Pathfinder ·        Visionary ·        Coalition Builder ·        Doer ·        Implementer ·        Power to Influence

Bruch and Ghoshal ·        Procrastinators ·        Disengaged ·        Distracted ·        Purposeful Lawler III ·        Lassez-Faire ·        Authoritarian ·        Human Relations ·        Participative Bennis and Thomas ·        Adaptation ·        Engagement ·        Voice ·        Integrity

Input from those who can provide knowledgeable input, the way to manage?

I use the term ‘‘knowledgeable input’’ because opinions from those not schooled in the subject are of little if any value. Occasionally someone who knows nothing about a topic may raise a very important issue, but will not have the ability to resolve the problem. Bennis and Thomas suggest that leadership skills are gained through profound experiences they refer to as life-defining moments and we need to be cognizant of these life-defining moments and learn from them. You’ll become a purposeful manager when you apply the principles of participative management and practice, you develop the ability to adapt to different circumstances and environments, you create shared meaning and motivate,

You treat all people with dignity and respect, and you maintain a strong moral compass. Your career target involves taking the lead as a purposeful manager, using the participative approach, and meeting the characteristics of the leader.

FOLLOWERS

Any discussion of leadership involves followers. I believe that in today’s knowledge-driven society the word follower may be an anachronism. The organizational leader is not giving a command to the followers to charge the hill without question. Where such leaders exist, the followers need to look elsewhere for long-term employment. That organization will not be here in the future. Leadership involves building a real sense of collegiality in which participants act as though success depends wholly on their individual input to the project or group. Refer to Chapter 4 for a full discussion of teams.

Those who take the lead are the visionaries, the pathfinders, the coalition builders, the ones who make the impossible possible, the doers, and the implementers. They are not just blue-sky thinkers. They balance the need for individual and team performance. They build a sense of trust and collegiality with the group. They build a sense of excitement. The relations are collegial. Their value system includes being the best. The word follower doesn’t exist.

LEADERSHIP MYTHS

Many myths surround leadership. Leaders are born with certain characteristics. True and false. Everyone can be a leader. Yes and no. Leaders are charismatic. Some are and some are not. Leaders are change agents.

Maybe. Leaders are autocratic. Some are always, some occasionally, and some never. Leaders come to the forefront when the situation arises. Probably true most of the time. As usual there is some truth to these myths.

Some people are born with leadership characteristics; the young child who displays that innate undefined something that attracts other children. Everyone can be a leader, but not everyone is willing to put forth the effort it takes to be a leader. Not everyone has the characteristics required of a leader. Some leaders are charismatic, although being charismatic is not a condition for demonstrated leadership. Not all leaders are change agents in the strictest sense. Some leaders are autocratic and others are autocratic when necessary. When opportunities do arise for leadership, someone needs to take up the challenge.

COMMUNICATION

Communication skills are absolutely essential but may not be effective if the communicator lacks sufficient knowledge about what to communicate. So we begin with the premise that the communicator has something to present of importance and understands the subject matter. As an entry level manager you will not be provided a researcher or speechwriter to clarify communications. You’re on your own. We assume that because something was said, its full meaning has been understood. We assume that if something has been written and then read, it communicated the desired expectations. Every profession cherishes its language and its acronyms. With the advent of the Web we often speak in shorthand without realizing how the receiver may interpret it. When dealing outside our own language we fail to account for differences in meaning.

Look back on your career as a professional and recognize how many problems were created from either a lack of communication or a misinterpretation of the communication.

PROVIDING FEEDBACK

Providing feedback involves making a judgment about someone’s theories, problem solutions, designs, proposals, or responses to many other requests. Much of today’s business literature suggests that judgment be avoided. I suggest that the word management is synonymous with judgment. Managers make judgments based on partial facts, so the ability to make judgments or reach some logical conclusion must become a competency.

There are no algorithms that deal with making an assessment and then making a qualified judgment related to some activity. Developing a scale from 1 to 10 and taking an average doesn’t work. As human beings we’re more complicated.

Feedback without making a judgment provides no value. Keep in mind that we’re discussing feedback that takes place every day in every encounter. Feedback can be either positive or negative. It’s very easy to provide positive feedback. When all interactions are positive, you as manager will look forward to working with that employee. It’s a pleasure to review the work of an employee who has all of the details under control. It’s a pleasure to work with the employee who is already contemplating subsequent steps in the process. If an employee meets or exceeds expectations, if a project team exceeds expectations, and if the department exceeds expectations, then the leader can bask in this performance. But what happens when the individual, the project team, or the department does not meet expectations? Is this a time to provide negative feedback? Most HR people suggest that negative feedback should be avoided and is also counterproductive. I would suggest just the opposite. Negative feedback can be provided diplomatically. If it cannot, then there are other problems that may need to be resolved. Perhaps you need to review some of your past practices in dealing with people. Some managers even develop a habit of congratulating employees even when the work effort fails, and regardless of the reasons for the failure. Perhaps these managers were raised in an environment where failure was considered as a success. Perhaps as children they played on teams where a team that was winning overwhelmingly could not add any more points to its total even if they were entitled to them. Such actions do not build character and such behavior is unacceptable when working with adults.

You cannot put a positive spin on performance that has not met the requirements. You can’t fail the person or team based on the results and then give either or both an ‘‘A’’ for effort. We’re in the real world. We are no longer in elementary school. You do a great injustice to employees when you do not provide effective feedback. I recall the comments from a supervisor who became very frustrated every time his manager came for a project review. The project was late, there were problems that required resolution, but the manager was praising the team for the fine job they were doing. Such actions on the part of the manager only exacerbate an existing problem.

I suggest that as a manager you use the following guideline: If you or your team goofed, admit it and learn something from the experience. Do you want your manager to tell you that your team did a great job when you personally know that your team didn’t meet expectations and you didn’t meet your personal expectations? You accepted those expectations at the time but for any number of reasons you just didn’t perform. So why try to sugar coat a lack of success? Why not admit it and just say we blew it; we’ll do better next time.

How negative feedback is presented is important; it cannot become personal, although it is often difficult to refrain from becoming personal if the failure occurred because of a lack of diligence. It’s difficult to focus solely on performance when someone fails to perform because of a poor attitude or laziness. However, leaders need to avoid becoming personal in providing feedback. It sends the wrong message not only to the individual but also to the group. What you said to the nonperformer will eventually reach the members of the group and a personal attack only diminishes you as the leader. If you as the manager lose your self-control, you’ve lost the argument.

A change in performance from acceptable to not acceptable occurs over some period of time. As managers, our responsibility is to recognize any decrease in performance and take the necessary action. The change may have taken place for many different reasons; health and family problems, work assignments, or any number of other issues may be affecting the employee. When these changes are recognized, dealt with, and resolved before they become major obstacles to performance, a great deal of anxiety can be eliminated. A quick response also requires much less effort on your part as the manager. It’s much easier to put out a small fire than one that has been allowed to spread.

Feedback is also very important because we sit in meetings and communicate not only verbally but also with our whole physical being. We convey agreement, frustration, disbelief, boredom, and inattention by adjusting our physical appearance in some way: a smile or nod of the head, a lifted eyebrow, twirling or tapping that pen or pencil, and paying more attention to the laptop than the presenter. These actions provide feedback to those engaged in the dialogue. In our one-on-one contacts we convey similar impressions of agreement, disagreement, acceptance, or rejection.

While feedback plays an important role in moving the organization forward, it’s basically a study in history. It tells us what happened and allows us to find ways for providing some form of corrective action. The feedback loops required for managing performance are basically the same as those required for controlling chemical and petroleum processes. The many variables in a chemical process are automatically controlled. However, those processes also use what is known as feed forward. What do we mean by feed forward? Feed forward allows us to anticipate the future corrective action based on current performance. As an example, the design of any chemical processing plant uses many control loops with feedback to develop a quality product. Modern process control systems also employ feed forward capabilities to anticipate possible process changes. The emphasis is on anticipation. The feed forward loops anticipate the changes that may have to be introduced because of some pre-dicted error in the system that has escalated over time. That process may be functioning just within specification limits but certain minor changes are occurring that will require modifying other settings if the process is to continue meeting requirements. Basically, feed forward looks to the future.

The following example will clarify the use of feed forward in relation to resolving people issues. You have a review with Tony, one of your staff, regarding some work he is currently doing. Tony’s work has really not met the requirements during the past months. As a manager you sit down with Tony and begin discussing his performance. Tony’s performance has been well below what you consider an acceptable level. There really isn’t anything that Tony has done that’s worthy of any kind of praise. If you show your immediate dissatisfaction with Tony’s performance, Tony will probably become defensive, you will try to defend your position, and the discussion will probably not yield a resolution of the situation. So the better approach may be to look to the future than to the past. Find some kind of corrective action to bring Tony back on track.

First you need to look at your responses to Tony over the period under consideration and think how you and Tony managed to get into this unfavorable situation. You need to think about some possible solutions before You confront Tony, and you need to get Tony involved in finding the solution. What do you really know about Tony? How much contact have you had with him during the past few months? Is Tony a person who needs close supervision and that supervision was not provided? What knowledge, skills, and attitudes does Tony need to improve in order to meet his objectives?

Responses to these questions are solely for your preparation for the discussion. You won’t directly confront Tony with them. If you take the feed forward approach you won’t begin by telling Tony about all of the things he lacks to be an effective contributor to the group. Feed forward is about the future. By structuring Tony’s workload within his competencies and setting some stretch targets within those competencies you and Tony can begin a new relationship. Tony may or may not accept the challenge. If he accepts the challenge he is probably on the way to becoming a more productive employee. If he resists your alternatives are limited. Termination after sufficient documentation may be necessary. You do need to understand that you have an investment in Tony and should do everything possible to make him a productive employee.

TYPES OF COMMUNICATION

Leadership depends to a great extent on effective communication. The following comments on each of five types of communication will not make you a better communicator but will hopefully sensitize you to the need for improving your communication skills. From there it’s up to you. The five

types of communication include:

1. Oral

2. Written

3. Graphic and pictorial

4. Listening

5. Reading

Oral Communication

Effective oral communication is not learned from reading: it takes practice, practice, and more practice. It requires understanding the fundamentals of good grammar. It involves developing a vocabulary that allows you to express your opinions, to state your position during a dialogue relative to reaching a decision, to phrase your questions clearly and concisely, and to make your wishes known on any number of matters.

As previously noted, all forms of communication depend on feedback. Feedback between people who are talking includes not only the content but also observation of physical responses. Since the majority of our communication is oral we need to be sensitive to those hidden messages. There is no one in any organization that does not engage in oral communication of some type on a daily basis. For those who report to you intelligent feedback sets the stage for reaching agreement on all issues related to the work effort. Regardless of the topic under discussion there are misinterpretations and misrepresentations that must be rationalized.

Written Communication

We learn to write by writing and not by reading about writing. Written communication takes on many different forms. It includes general correspondence, reports of different types, project proposals, procedures, recordkeeping, operating instructions, spreadsheet data, announcements, documentation, and presentations. While the technical community is often viewed as having poor writing skills, I have also found accountants and financial people to be lacking in writing skills. We can add to that list just about every profession at every level. Professional staff members frequently labor over even simple project reports. Unfortunately with the elimination of many secretarial positions, professionals no longer have anyone to correct their grammar or rewrite documents. There are no simple answers to resolving this issue. There are plenty of opportunities for learning how to write clearly and concisely but over my years of experience I have not found very many employees taking up the challenge.

The use of e-mail has only exacerbated the problem. I need not dwell on this issue, but e-mail is a major source of miscommunication. In the early days of telegraphy and telex, every word was counted because we paid by the word. Unfortunately the cost per word for e-mail is insignificant, so it’s easier to use more words than to develop concise statements.

This does not suggest a case against e-mail, but since it is our major mode of communication we need to recognize the need to write with a modicum of correctness. The intent is not to go back to diagramming sentences but to learn just a few fundamentals of good written communication.

Graphic and Pictorial Communication

Graphics and pictures can often communicate ideas and concepts more effectively than the use of a lot of verbiage. However, graphics and pictures must be presented clearly just like any other form of communication. A presentation graphic that cannot be read from the back row of the room provides little if any benefit. Also, too many professionals in all disciplines assume that their audience is as well versed in their topic as they are. So graphics and pictures provide a means for communicating, but they must be explained when used outside the immediate group of professionals.

As a manager you will most likely be involved in making presentations above your managerial level, so make sure that you are communicating to your audience and not to yourself. That diagram or spreadsheet may have meaning to you but does it make sense for the audience? The adage that a picture is worth a thousand words cannot be disputed, but it must be the right picture.

Listening as Communication

Managers need to develop their listening skills. That involves hearing the message and not jumping to conclusions without a full understanding of the message. There are times when we get impatient when listening to the views of others, and perhaps with justification. It takes patience to listen to a boring presenter. It takes patience to listen to someone who is repeating what has already been presented. There are occasions when someone may have to be told to stop talking. The question has been answered and there’s no reason to continue the conversation, just cut it off politely. It takes patience to listen to that ill-prepared speaker. But we need to be careful and make sure we’re not missing that hidden kernel of truth that may be of significant value.

As managers we may not have control of such situations outside our immediate department’s activities. We should make sure that our people do not present similar problems when dealing outside our department. We should try and make it easy for others to hear our message. Good listening also involves good communicators. Can there be anything worse in a time sensitive meeting than to listen to someone who is focused on what appears

to be irrelevant to the discussion or who lacks coherence because of a lack of preparation?

Reading as Communication

In my consulting practice and graduate-level university teaching I always question what professionals and managers are reading. I’m usually very disappointed with the responses. Most haven’t read a book related to managing in the last two years, even though they are taking advanced degrees in management. Some do not even keep up in their field of interest. They do not keep up with the daily news events related to their organization’s competitors. I hear such responses as, I don’t have time, I’ve heard it all before, and the information doesn’t help me do my job.

Reading is an important part of a manager’s responsibility. It is a stimulus for creative thought—the kind of thinking required to move the organization forward. We can learn from those news accounts about organizations and their activities. We learn what others have done and are doing. We learn how the actions of others can impact our own operations.

Remember the Tylenol incident some years ago, when Johnson & Johnson removed Tylenol from the shelves because some individual tampered with the product, causing several deaths? There are lessons in this decision by Johnson & Johnson that can be transferred to any organization and across all levels of management—ethical behavior, organizational responsibility, and management’s response to a major crisis.

So with the amount of information being presented every day, how do managers learn to cope with this mass of data? Managers need to develop some speed-reading skills. They need to be able to sort out the wheat from the chaff. They need to quickly determine what is useful and how to discard the nonessential. The need for speed reading has become doubly important since the introduction of e-mail and electronic communication.

Every day we are confronted with information we have not requested. While there is controversy over the benefits of speed reading, it does teach how to scan for relevant information.

SUMMARY

Leadership and communication skills are the two most important skills of the manager. They are closely linked. Leadership cannot be provided without good communication skills. However, leadership as generally taught does not apply to the new manager because the effort focuses on leaders at the upper-most organizational levels. So instead of leadership with all of its upper-level applications, think of your first managerial appointment as taking the lead. That will help you keep the role of leadership in the proper perspective. Taking the lead means just what the words say; you can’t live with the status quo.

The five types of communication are absolutely essential. Oral and written are probably the most important because without them it is impossible to convey a thought, idea, concept, proposal, or solution. Graphics and pictures provide an opportunity to simply sketch out what those thoughts, ideas, and concepts involve. If we don’t learn to listen we’re doomed not to be able to carry on any kind of successful dialogue in relation to resolving a problem or exploring a new opportunity. Read, read, read! We acquire most information through reading. The faster we can read and comprehend the better. If you’re reading poetry, that’s a different matter.