Alone At The Casino On The Whim Of A Super Hero

Supporting managers and the way people work together has a bigger impact than focusing on any one person's performance

Managing other people is one of the hardest things we can be asked to do. Ask any manager and they will tell you it is the hardest part of their job. Even the most clever people I know struggle through it, and in many organisations the HR process offers little to help.

I've been a manager and felt how lonely it is to lead other people, manage competing interests, and deal with the frustrations when the HR process just becomes another thing to do, rather than it being a legitimate support for me to be a better leader of people.

There is a difference between a process for HR administration and a process for leading people's discretionary contribution. That does not mean that these two requirements are mutually exclusive from each other, because instilling a process that supports the hard part of managing actually gives a bigger return on the costs of HR administration.

Organisations have an obligation to provide those tasked with the difficult job of leading others with a workable process that is not only about complying with the law, but is genuinely about nurturing effective relationships and bringing out the best from people. That is where The H Factor comes from, and why we focus on the performance side of the employment relationship.

On the other side, our friends over at Outsourced Payroll are there to help with the transactional requirements (eg rostering, payroll, and superannuation) of employing people.

From a performance perspective, the trust, respect, and care that a team has for their manager is known to be one of the biggest influences on overall team performance and a driver of employee turnover. Systems and processes that genuinely support managers in their role therefore have a direct impact on the success of the organisation.
 
One of the most effective ways to support the role of managers is the intentional development of interdependence, rather than independence. Highly effective teams thrive on interdependence, where members build upon each other's strengths, rather than performance being dependent on the whim of a few independent super-heroes.

Interdependence was a key consideration in creating the deliverables review process in The H Factor. That process encourages people to think about their contribution to business outcomes, and provides a mechanism for ongoing communication and feedback. It is far more powerful than the traditional task assessment process that is so typically used as a performance review. It is a supportive tool for leader's to empower rather than direct, and fosters collaboration, open communication, and a shared sense of purpose.

Another consideration in supporting those being asked to lead others is a process for driving activity in the present moment, through having effective performance indicators.

Think about these two questions, and pay attention to your reference point from which you contemplate your answer:

• Are you successful?
• Is your team successful?

When contemplating those questions, were you thinking about the past, present, or future? We often think about success like it's something that will happen or has happened, rather than something that is happening here and now. The questions were asked in the present tense, but many people answer them from a perspective of the past or the future.

This matters, because if we think success is in the past, then we may think we don't need to change the present. If we think success is something that will happen in the future, then we may be tempted to wait and see what happens. We might defer our effort and overlook the effort or practices we can do now. 

A common trap to fall into when setting a key performance indicator is to set the result - the target or goal that we want to achieve in the future. So we don't see ourselves as successful until that goal is achieved - which most of the time turns out to be untrue. Often that future result is not entirely within our control, whether that be due to the state of the economy, the decisions of other parties, unforeseen business situations, or other external influences or circumstances.

So often I've looked back on something that didn't work out as I had initially hoped, and been able to appreciate that my energy and efforts were worthwhile. The target was helpful but achievement of it was not the only measure of success. 

The problem with tying our success only to achieving a future goal, and therefore to setting key performance indicators, is that we make it hard to discuss progress ahead of time. I can be putting in enormous effort, but not being effective, but I won't realise that until a future time, or I under appreciate the value of resilience in applying my work because I sense the achievement of the goal is so far away. Then I might miss the opportunity to make the little adjustments to my effort, or my approach, that could be the difference in my effectiveness.

As a leader, by focusing on the result, I may not notice the need to give the helpful intervention that makes my team's effort, or their approach, more effective.

So a better way to set key performance indicators, or whatever other name you want to give them, is to step back from the goal and focus on the effective activities that will most likely help you, your colleague, or your team achieve the goal. If we identify those activities, and think about how can we monitor the energy being put into them, and the effect we are achieving from that effort, then we create the opportunity for effective timely intervention.

Frequency of the review is important then because when the focus is on the activity rather than the result, then we are no longer just adopting a 'wait and see', or an 'over to you' approach to achieving the goal. We are in it together, and the role of the review process is mutually recognised and appreciated, and therefore is valued time and energy for all parties. 

Putting all of this another way, if you managed a football team, would you employ a coach whose approach to achieving success was to wait for the result of the season before they set a plan for each player? It sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?

So, for example, you may want to change the KPI for your sales team so that it isn't their monthly budget, and instead enables more effective present and honest assessment of their energy in the activities that will help them achieve connection, generate leads, show your business capabilities, and convert sales.

You might also reconsider applying an annual review process, and look for a system that supports managers to give frequent feedback and helpful intervention.

When we bring our perception of success into the present, then we can focus those we lead on their current activity and practices, and guide and support their conscious decisions about their current discretionary effort.

The H Factor's 'My Deliverables' review process is designed to facilitate this approach. It is designed to support managers in leading performance across an organisation. When combined with the built-in tools for training, policies and procedures, career development planning, and team's activity management, it provides a powerful resource. It helps organisations achieve an interdependence culture that powers working together confidently and effectively.

Consistently applying a review process that is frequent, founded on business outcomes, and based on supporting everyone's capacity for contribution across an entire organisation has a compounding impact. It is a defining characteristic of the most successful teams.