For friends only

My last blog seems to have made quite a splash in office. While most have had good things to say, some had reservations and some quite frankly did not understand what I said.

While I am not in the habit of explaining myself, those who misinterpreted me are actually my friends. I am always willing to make exceptions for friends. So here goes...

1. Every human being ultimately is a product of his/her own experiences in life. Thoughts, perceptions, needs, desires and motivation are also a product of the same.

2. Most theories of management were postulated by men without management degrees. It was a science of observation and learning that helped them to learn, grow and excel at managing people. Most of them worked in a bottom-up manner and for prolonged periods in the same company.

Companies must encourage growth from within its talent pool. If you think a degree from a management school makes a huge difference, send deserving candidates to such institutes and get them back to run the show. Adjust remuneration packages of such candidates so that they aren't inclined to jump ship (remember you need to pay similar/higher remuneration had you hired a fresh graduate from the same institute).

Will this tactic act as a motivator?
Will it create a loyalty among employees towards the company?
Try it and you won't need my affirmation.

3. Not all people are born managers. Born managers do not need to be trained in man management. They are usually people who have a deeper understanding and respect of human pschycology. They are normal human beings who really care and believe in the goodness of others. They are usually people who naturally try to look for the best in others. They are highly conscious and tolerant of human failings.

4. While training can help those who are not born managers, it can only do little good.

5. Academic intelligence alone is not a benchmark nor a hallmark of a good manager.

6. I agree that a cashier cannot be a chef. Which is why he does not command a chef nor guide him in his work. Only an exceptional chef can lead a team of good chefs. Any skill based/specialized work needs to be supervised only by an expert who is equally good (if not better) than his team.

Why? Because you only understand the challenges involved when you face them yourself.

7. Management institutes in the country are just facilitation/training institutes.

Case studies are examples of past events/challenges that others faced. They are a learning exercise that can be obtained for free on GOOGLE SEARCH.

Do you live the challenge in a case study? No.
Do you get to see the actual people who were involved? No.
Do you know the challenges the people involved faced? To an extent.
How can you make a decision based on generalized assumptions?
Who is to judge whether your decision would be right?
What guarantee do u have of the actual reactions of the people involved?
What do you know of the caliber/needs of the real people involved?

Of a classroom session of survival tactics in war and a game of paint ball, which do you think offers better understanding of the challenges?

8. My personal experiences have definitely played an integral role in shaping my thoughts. I have worked with seven different managers so far in various organizations.

Apart from working in some major MNC's, I did some short projects when I had some time on my hands.

I worked for free for a month as a consultant(a honorary title), in a small flat that was barely converted into a recruitment office. The previous people had left due to lowly wages. The so-called proprietor/owner never showed up. The guy who set up the office computer network was a relative of the owner who kept his own timings. The office manager, either stayed shut in his room or went for long smoking breaks. I was required to hire a new team for the office as well as interview suitable candidates for certain MNC clients. For a job that needed at least a college degree, had a six day work week and paid only 5000 rupees and no other perks, what motivation can u provide?

Have I played people management roles? Yes.
Do I understand the challenges of a people manager? Yes.
Do I have/had a problem with any of my managers? No.
Do I hate managers? I dislike anyone who does not respect, appreciate and deserve their positions in life. Be it a politician, clerk, housewife, businessman or manager.

Why do I believe some people are undeserving of what they have? Because I believe in FATE.

9. I speak the truth without reservations and mincing words. The previous post was about "Things a manager should not do to in order to be a good manager" (not effective or efficient).

I have always had a very good rapport with all my managers till date. All of them had varied backgrounds and qualifications. Never have I played office politics nor plotted against a manager. If I had a concern/reservation/suggestion, I went right up and spoke my mind. I still do. I never play a part or try to be someone I am not.

The previous post was a collation of facts from my experiences so far.

10. As for what yardstick should be used to measure performance at work - my answer, as earlier is QUALITY.

I challenge any company in the world to disclose their figures during periods of increased productivity per person/machine versus customer push back/grievances. It will always be a directly proportional value.

When your mother or wife cooks five different dishes for you, what matters most is the taste. Tasteless food will not satisfy your appetite/hunger, even if you are served a large spread.

A tree/plant cannot be forced to produce more than its natural capacity of tasty fruit/vegetable/cereal. Creating hybrids for higher productivity alters the very nature of the product. The focus should be on facilitating a healthy crop year after year by combining advanced scientific methods and natural processes.

I am not against productivity. If my hen lays two golden eggs instead of one, I am definitely not going to complain. But if the same hen starts giving me two normal eggs instead of a golden one, well, then I have a BIG problem.

11. It is not easy to fine balance productivity and quality. Again, between a highly productive and a person with high quality, there is no guarantee of who would eventually make a better manager. Companies should make their reward structures flexible. They should be designed to serve individual needs.

12. When a manager and his subordinate sit together and discuss the subordinates performance, it is not a 360 degree appraisal. It is a 180 degree appraisal.

A 360 degree feedback is only complete when a manager is evaluated based not only on his team's performance but also on the feedback from his team.

Team feedback should be collected by the boss of a respective manager preferably by anonymous questionnaires/feedback forms. Anonymous feedback guarantees candid and truthful answers as subordinates do not have to fear retribution.
Questionnaires should consist of open-ended questions. Specific instances could be asked for as well. Answers should be carefully reviewed and evaluated for merit/context.

It is not humanly possible for a person/manager to satisfy everyone in his team. Anonymous feedback could also result in unfair accusations. Therefore, an average should be calculated from the feedback received. If a majority of the team is happy, very good. If not, the situation warrants immediate attention.

Subordinate and manager feedback should have the same periodicity. The idea behind such a feedback mechanism is to ensure that there aren't any violent disconnects/unrest at any level. The idea is to create and encourage an environment of free, honest and spontaneous, speech and expression.