The SHRM Web site posted an article recently, suggesting that "Bad bosses—more than bad salaries—drive workers away."
The story is a preview of a study to be published in a future edition of The Leadership Quarterly. According to a survey of 700 mostly southeastern employees:
- Between 31% and 39% had supervisors who ignored them, failed to give credit when appropriate, and didn't keep their promises.
- More than a quarter had supervisors who disparaged them with other employees or managers.
- Twenty-three percent had supervisors who blamed others to cover his or her own mistakes.
As Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams told HR News. “That's a lot of different ways to say, ‘My boss is an idiot,’" Adams noted, “It's just unfortunate that the people who have the personalities you listed gravitate toward leadership positions.”
I agree with Mr. Adams's observation, but not his interpretation. There always seem to be more negative, dysfunctional people in the overall workforce than in the ranks of leadership alone (though the percentage is arguable higher). The problem, as I see it, is not that these misfits are stepping forward, but that management has an unfortunate propensity to advance them.
Good and Bad Bosses
A while ago, my staff and I took an admittedlt unscientific poll. We asked people to think of their three favorite and three worst managers. What characteristics did the good bosses have in common? And what traits did the worst ones share?
The results were surprisingly consistent.
The Best Bosses, in nearly all instances, tended to:
- Listen more, seeking input actively, and letting people know their opinions were important
- Understand the business well — not just their own areas, but how the different pieces fit together
- Be decisive, capable of making sound decisions based on available information
- Give timely and constructive feedback
- Engage people in their organizational roles, and provide a "line of sight" into how their individual performance affects the group's success.
The Worst Bosses, regardless of setting, tended to:
- Isolate themselves, accepting input from only a selected group of managers.
- Have a limited understanding of the "big picture," focusing instead only on their areas of (often technical) expertise; either uninterested in, or incurious about, the overall enterprise.
- Be indecisive, insecure about their roles, and incapable of making independent judgements.
- Avoid contact with subordinates, providing little more than annual performance reviews (with little or no input about the employee's actual performance).
- Have a fragmented view of the organization, and perhaps be a bit misanthropic — certainly uncomfortable, both with others and the job. creating an unsettled, even apprehensive, work environment.
SHRM's Conclusions
According to SHRM , poor supervisory practices, rather than dissatisfaction with pay, is the predominant driver of employee turnover. Our firm's work in employee surveys certainly supports that conclusion. The article also notes that "Such workers are less likely to work longer or on weekends, or take on more tasks." To which we'd add: "or take on more risk," a characteristic essential to innovation. Companies with poor management practives become risk-averse, which essentially dries up the flow of new ideas.
“Employees stuck in an abusive [reporting] relationship," the study's director said, "experienced more exhaustion, job tension, nervousness, depressed mood and mistrust.” Many of you, at some point, may have "been there, done that."
The SHRM article is a good read, and I'm sure the full study will be illuminating. In the meantime, we're wondering if any of you share our views on the respective characteristics of good and bad managers. We would certainly love to hear from you!
For more on what bad bosses can do, see "Management by Mediocrity," "Reorganize THIS!" and Episode 88 of The Cranky Middle-Manager Show.
