Howard Schultz Starbucks Chairman
What employees expect of management could fill volumes depending on who they are and where they are in their career but details aside Schultz is right. Successful leaders earn their followers and if they have to demand leadership recognition they won't be leaders for long.
What employees expect of management could fill volumes depending on who they are and where they are in their career but details aside Schultz is right. Successful leaders earn their followers and if they have to demand leadership recognition they won't be leaders for long.
Unfortunately, the notion of "us vs them" is alive and well when it comes to describing the dynamics between "management" and "workers".
ReplyDeleteWhile not always deserved, workers take a fairly cynical view towards management largely because of what I once humorously heard described as the BOHICA priniciple. "Bend Over Here It Comes Again" is oftentimes an apt description of what workers consider to be empty promises and useless fad initiatives promulgated by management.
If management focuses on doing what they say and saying what they do, they're 80% there.
Why do we usually talk about "management" and "employees"? Isn't everyone first and foremost an employee? Doesn't the labels immediately put up a wall between the two?
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the "wall" that oftentimes exist between management and employees go well beyond the existence of these 2 terms. Everything from pay scales, size of offices and titles (just to name a few factors) contribute to this wall.
ReplyDeleteSmaler/entrepreneurial companies tend to be better about blurring the lines between management and employees but perhaps by their nature, this is almost a requirement because people in these organizations generally wear multiple hats and have a 'roll up your sleeves' attitude - traits which seem to be found less frequently in large, bureaucratic organizations.
It's ironic though to hear developing companies as "growing up" when they bring in more seasoned management, introduce 'typical' corporate requirement like formal budgeting, etc. Some would argue that these are the first steps toward introducing bureaucracy and the 'us vs them' mentality.
Often young companies grow on the strength of untested employees only to move them aside to bring in individuals they feel are more experienced and capable for the next phase of growth. Too bad that doesn't always work.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to young, growing companies, there's clearly no right or wrong answer on when (or if) it makes sense to bring in outside talent to oversee the next phase of the company's development.
ReplyDeleteBut the reality is that as companies go thru their evolutionary cycle, different skill sets are required at differnt stages. For example, a company looking to get financing from outside investors, would certainly benefit from having someone on the team who has experience dealing with venture capitalists and/or angel investors. Similarly, it wouldn't hurt for a company looking to go public to have individuals on staff who have first-hand experience with that process.
My experience has been that the really smart entrepreneurs are those who understand what their shortcomings are and are not insecure about filling the gaps with outside talent (if the talent doesn't already exist within the organization).
Just to name a few recent exmples, the founders of Google hired Eric Schmidt (someone who had significant, prior corporate experience) and the founder of Facebook hired experienced executives for the COO and CFO positions.
All of that is true but the problem is most companies talk the talk but don't walk the walk when it comes to respecting their employees. I don't know how it is at Starbucks but most everywhere I've been its words more than actions.
ReplyDelete