by Jonathan
ByrnesWhat is the single most important thing a
CEO can do to maximize his or her company’s performance?
The answer is to creatively, aggressively, and
systematically build the capabilities of the company’s
middle management team: the vice presidents, directors, and
managers.
Regardless of what high-potential initiative the CEO
chooses for the company, the middle management team’s
performance will determine whether it is a success or
failure. And if the middle management team is performing in
high gear, the managers themselves will generate the right
initiatives, and constantly adapt and improve them during
implementation.
I recall several years ago reading a description of one
major U.S. automobile company’s middle management team. The
phrase that stuck in my mind was "the frozen middle." The
essential idea was that whatever initiative top management
decided the company would pursue, it would be slowed to a
standstill by the unwillingness and inability of the
company’s middle management team to carry it out.
Ultimately, this company lost enormous market share to
foreign competitors, and even now struggles to recover.
In education, it is well known that the quality of a
school system is largely determined by the quality of the
principals. If a school has a good principal, it will
perform well. If the school has good teachers, but a poor
principal, performance will suffer. In all sectors, middle
management makes all the difference.
Initiatives or
capabilities?
Try this mental test. Think about a typical three-month
period for your company. What proportion of your company’s
top management time is spent on each of the following three
activities: (1) new strategic initiatives; (2) managing the
company’s operations; and (3) building middle management
capabilities? In most companies, the time spent on the first
two dwarfs the time spent on the third.
Yet, building middle management capabilities is the
underlying key to succeeding in the other two activities.
This occurs for two reasons.
First, virtually all major strategic initiatives have to
be carried out by the middle managers. Their flexibility and
leadership skills will determine how able they are to tailor
and adapt initiatives to the company’s changing
circumstances.
Second, a strong middle management team will produce
outstanding operational results, easing the need for top
managers to oversee and intervene directly in day-to-day
operations. A well-functioning middle management team also
will proactively create a constant stream of new initiatives
to remedy problems and seize new opportunities. Middle
management excellence is the key leverage point for great
performance.
The problem is that middle management excellence, like
leadership, is a difficult concept to pin down. (See
The Essence of Leadership.) Consequently, it is very
difficult to specify a systematic program to build middle
management capabilities.
In some companies, middle management development takes
the form of disjointed short courses, either in-house or
outside, that cover important aspects of management. These
usually are helpful, but are not enough. Many managers find
themselves "too busy" to dedicate much time to their
personal development, especially if they regard the content
as weakly relevant. A few fortunate managers get to attend
lengthier, comprehensive executive education courses.
Mostly, it seems that top managers simply assume that
management experience coupled with constructive progress
reviews will be enough for middle managers to “get it.”
While the most able managers can thrive in this situation,
more simply settle into a routine of managing "business as
usual," accompanied by occasional initiatives when big
problems arise.
It doesn’t have to be this way. If you look carefully at
the great companies of our day, like GE, middle management
excellence is in fact one of top management’s very highest
priorities. Even after GE managers leave the company, they
most often have the "look and feel" of GE’s management team:
a focus on systematically teaching their subordinates to
analyze and improve the businesses, and on teaching them to
pass this skill on to their own management teams.
The core of middle
management excellence
A number of years ago, when I was a doctoral student at
Harvard Business School, I was privileged to take a course
in teaching using the case method. The course was taught by
the late Professor C. Roland Christensen, HBS’s legendary
teacher of teachers. In the course, he said something that
has remained with me to this day, and is one of the
organizing principles of my teaching, research, writing, and
consulting.
Professor Christensen noted that a great course was like
a great musical. If the audience leaves a musical whistling
two or three tunes for the rest of their lives, it was a
great success. Similarly, if a class leaves a course with a
deep understanding of the two or three most important ideas
in the field, and with the ability to apply them capably for
the rest of their lives, the course was a great success.
The biggest challenge in developing a course is always to
identify clearly the two or three most important underlying
concepts. With this understanding in mind, a teacher can
organize all of the course material in a way that amplifies,
explains, and enriches the students’ understanding of these
underlying ideas. At the end of a great course, the students
will indeed "whistle" the course’s "two or three tunes" for
the rest of their lives.
The "two or three tunes" principle applies to management
as well. What are the most important two or three tunes that
create middle management excellence? Here are my three
candidates: (1) managing at the right level; (2) coordinated
profitability management; and (3) managing as teaching.
Managing at the right
level
If you look carefully at companies, their business
activities generally reflect a combination of what was
needed three to five years ago, what is needed today, and
what will be needed three to five years from now. In my
experience, many companies’ activities reflect 40 percent
past needs, 40 percent present needs, and 20 percent future
needs, at most. This is a critical failure, because it takes
up to five years to develop and implement the major
initiatives needed to adapt a company to succeed in the
future.
The root cause of this problem is a lack of systematic
middle management leadership. An essential trait for a
successful middle manager is the ability to see which
company activities reflect which needs, and to be able to
shift these activities from the past to the future. (I
described this process in my column
Manage Paradigmatic Change.)
As managers progress up the business hierarchy, their
focus must increasingly shift from managing the company as
it is, or as it was, to building the company of the future.
(I described this in more detail in my column
Managing at the Right Level.)
In a nutshell, first-line managers should focus on
producing great results and improving day-to-day operations.
Directors should focus half on structuring the work of their
departments and coaching their managers’ performance, and
half on change initiatives that require coordination with
their counterparts. Vice presidents should focus almost
entirely on building the company of the future, both by
visualizing what the company will need to be, and by
coaching their directors in innovation and change
management.
Hence, at each level, middle managers should increasingly
learn and practice change management and leadership so they
are masterful by the time they reach the vice president
level.
Coordinated profitability
management
In almost every company I’ve researched or worked with over
the past two decades, 30-40 percent of the business is
unprofitable by any measure, and 20-30 percent not only
produces all the profits but also cross-subsidizes the
losses from the unprofitable part of the business.
There is a pervasive assumption in business that if each
functional area is well run, with sales maximizing revenues,
operations minimizing costs, and so on, the company will be
as profitable as possible. In fact, nothing could be further
from the truth. This has been a key theme of my columns from
the first one (see
Who’s Managing Profitability?).
It is essential that middle managers, primarily at the
director level, develop a broader view of the business. They
must learn to coordinate with their counterparts in order to
understand which parts of the business are profitable, which
are not, and which are somewhere in between. This can be
modeled using a PC in a few months (see
The Hunt for Profits), and it has vast positive
implications for a company’s culture and performance.
With insightful profitability analysis, the middle
management team can create a set of coordinated, high-impact
initiatives that will (1) radically increase current
profitability and (2) reposition the company for the future.
The first priority is to lock in the most profitable
business before the competitors identify and go after the
best customers and products. The second priority is to get
more business like the most profitable. After that, the
middle management team can develop measures to improve the
profitability of the marginal business, and when all else
fails drop the residual.
All this requires a high degree of interdepartmental
coordination at the middle management level. Some sales
dollars are profitable, some are not. The best way to
increase operations and supply chain productivity is to
bring in business that fits the company’s operating
capabilities. This is the true secret to Dell’s historical
success. (See
Dell Manages Profitability, Not Inventory.) As the
company’s markets change, profitability maximization becomes
a moving target.
Profitability models are a critical core component of
this process because they give the whole middle management
team: (1) a shared perspective on how they can coordinate to
affect profitability, how each manager’s activities affect
the others’, and (2) a foundation for creating a joint,
apolitical action plan.
In the absence of this shared view and shared agenda, the
company’s departments usually create competing initiatives,
with all the counterproductive politics that this situation
entails. And, politically-charged competing initiatives can
indeed "freeze a company’s middle," bringing the company’s
progress to a dead stop.
Managing as teaching
The essence of great management is great teaching. You can
only create new innovations and advance in the hierarchy if
your managers are capable of operating on their own. If you
find yourself constantly pulled into day-to-day issues, the
underlying problem probably is that you haven’t succeeded in
teaching your managers to manage.
As a manager ascends the company hierarchy, his or her
management emphasis must shift from managing toward teaching
and developing managers. The CEO, except in a few very
successful companies like GE, typically doesn’t do this, so
it has to happen at the vice president level and below.
This is so important that it actually defines the true
vice president role: vice presidents should be at most
50 percent managers, and 50 percent or more developers of
managers. At lower levels, the teaching component is
probably 25 percent at the director level, and 10 percent at
the manager level.
Great teaching doesn’t happen overnight. Even at
first-rate universities with engaged, capable students, it
takes a semester or more for students to learn a subject.
Yet there are some cornerstones to great teaching that apply
to managers as well as professors.
- Clarity on the essentials. Like
professors, managers must not only know their field, but
also know how to teach it. The essential first step is
identifying the "two or three tunes" that are the key to
great performance. These generally are the "whys," not
the "hows."
- Enriching the understanding. In a
great course, the bulk of the course material is
organized to amplify and illustrate the two or three
underlying concepts. In this way, the more detailed
knowledge enhances the learner’s ability to work with
the core ideas, while making the whole body of knowledge
more memorable.
- Active learning. Productive
learning often takes place in stages. First, the learner
is exposed to the core concepts, and then he or she
tries to apply them and finds that he or she needs to
understand them better. This makes the learner more
receptive, and so the process repeats itself. Most
effective courses are structured this way. Periodic
tests help highlight progress and areas where more work
is needed. By contrast, all too often in business,
subordinates are simply instructed and left largely on
their own.
Teaching managers to
manage
The highest calling in management is teaching your managers
to manage. Middle management performance is the single most
important element in corporate performance. Yet how many top
management teams view this not only as a high priority, but
also as a core business process subject to rigorous analysis
and constant improvement?
Middle management excellence, resting on managing at the
right level, coordinated profitability management, and
managing as teaching, can be systematically developed and
constantly improved. It is the ultimate point of leverage
for all corporate performance.