In recent weeks, more and more executives are voicing frustration, and it’s been building for a long time. COVID forced remote work when most organizations had no idea how to design and implement virtual work, and managers were ill equipped for managing it. Since then, companies have had to grapple with various hybrid models and employees demanding more pay, more flexibility, and more perks. Now, declines in productivity, shrinking profit margins, layoffs, and cost-cutting are bringing levels of frustration to the breaking point. In recent client conversations, executives tell me there are several factors that contributed to this situation, but three are key:
Balancing compassion with accountability can be tough.
During the pandemic and its aftermath of worker shortages, employers worked very hard at becoming more compassionate—allowing for never-heard-of flexibility. Employees demanded higher wages, all while working less in the office. Added to that, leaders at all levels of the organization were not skilled in leading remote work. Micromanagement practices and other management tactics of the past didn’t work anymore because employees were not physically present. Some organizations, in their efforts in compassion and flexibility, made the mistake of abdicating on accountability, and “un-ringing that bell” is very difficult. Compassionate leadership is important, but it always needs to be balanced against clear accountability. For organizations that may have lost focus on accountability for performance, regaining productivity and reducing leadership frustration can be achieved through regaining balance. You need crystal clear expectations, clear communication and transparent measurement, and consistent coaching for results. For more ideas on balancing accountability with compassion, click here. Making the organization more accountable again requires clear communication related to performance expectations, and the communications need to be based on meaningful data.
Not enough focus on meaningful data.
One revelation has become apparent during recent years: some organizations were measuring employees by activity rather than results. Obviously, employees need to perform certain activities as part of their regular roles and responsibilities, but have we been clear on defining results and outcomes required for individuals, teams, etc., based on organization and departmental Key Performance Indicators? If we measure activity, we’ll get activity. If activity is used for measurement, holding people accountable for results becomes more difficult.
Has your organization defined and communicated expected results or outputs for employees, teams, and functional areas? Our organizations should be asking, “What specific, measurable, realistic outputs or results does the organization need to see from each person, each team, each function per a specific period of time?” If an organization measures and tracks results and outcomes, it can be better at communicating clearly to employees about performance and productivity that falls short. It’s not personal; it’s the data that shows the shortcoming. Performance feedback does not have to be personal if you have clear, meaningful data based on clear performance numbers. One past client did a great job with this. When employees complained that more employees were needed in the area, the manager sat down with the team to share performance and cost data based on team results, and then he explained how they could “earn” another employee in the area. Conversely, when performance in the area was low, the data clearly showed what improvements were needed and where.
Lack of equipping and supporting middle managers.
Middle managers are the primary resource in the organization for aligning strategy, culture, and operational performance. They are pivotal in balancing strategy and operational goals and bringing them to fruition. We often expect middle managers to cover too much ground. We want them to help manage and implement major change initiatives, manage hybrid schedules, provide input on (and communicate) layoffs, improve employee churn rates, manage operational firefighting, hire workers into open positions, and keep employee morale and performance high even though employee job demands are more complex than ever before. In hybrid environments, strengthening skill sets related to building a collaborative culture and high performance teams could bolster performance numbers. Unfortunately, few managers have the training in building teams to replace the focus on one-to-one supervision. To improve both individual and team productivity, we need to better equip middle managers as soon as possible. Realigning their priorities will also be necessary in most places.
Reducing executive frustration in our organizations is possible. It can be done by rebalancing accountability with compassion, using clear and relevant data about performance, and equipping middle managers in their pivotal role in improving performance.
For a complimentary, 60-minute brainstorming session or for more information on helping your organization improve efficiency, cost, and operational performance, please contact me or message me in LinkedIn.