Let me say at the outset I completely believe management is no easy job. As I've written about before for Forbes, doing the job well requires a diverse skill set. Depending on the circumstances, a good manager at times has to be a psychologist, a coach, a policeman, an accountant, and a diplomat... among many others.
That said, despite the role's multiple challenges, there's ample evidence -- with national studies showing seven out of 10 employees work in various states of disengagement -- that too often the job isn't being done well, with important managerial functions routinely ignored and overlooked.
Accordingly, following is my selection for the "Most Neglected Management Function," along with some close runners-up. As this is a purely personal "award," based more on opinion than data (though some supporting data is provided), I'll be interested to hear readers' opinions on this subject as well.
My winner (or loser, depending on how you look at it), as you may have gleaned from the title, is:
Employee development: Developing employees is the classic example of a management function that's both highly valued and highly neglected. For busy managers, generally with too much to do in too little time, it's a very easy task to put off to some indefinite point in the future... since it's exceedingly hard to calculate ROI on. And in a lean-and-mean environment where resources are perpetually stretched thin, functions without clear payback are usually functions that don't get done. Yet studies in Harvard Business Review and elsewhere show that meaningful development activities are much appreciated by high-potential talent, and lack of such activities fuels unwanted early exits. This completely aligns with my own management experience: Lack of development opportunities were a frequent employee frustration, while thoughtful development and training were always a much-appreciated loyalty builder.
There are, however, other worthy "neglected" contenders; here are four of them.
Employee recognition: My days in management taught me you can make a solid case for employee "recognition" (or lack thereof). In two-and-a-half decades of employee surveys I was involved with, only one management issue came up repeatedly as a pain point in each one them: recognition. Employees never felt they were getting enough of it. That's not to say managers should indiscriminately provide recognition when undeserved (as that does nothing but undermine management credibility), but it makes no sense to withhold it when it genuinely is deserved. Something as easy and cost-free as a few words of informal heartfelt praise, for example, cost nothing but can mean a great deal to those on the receiving end.
Accountability: This may seem a surprising choice for inclusion on this list, as managers are more often faulted for being unfairly tough than unfairly easy. There is, however, a vast difference between random bossiness and strong results-oriented leadership. Studies show that many managers, even senior managers, are surprisingly weak at accountability. One survey in Harvard Business Review notes that 46% of senior managers were rated poorly on the measure "Holds people accountable -- firm when they don't deliver."
Setting clear goals and objectives: This is a basic but underrated function. While often treated as a nettlesome bureaucratic exercise -- an annual HR irritant that unfortunately has to be dealt with! -- it actually has a "long tail" with substantive implications for how employee performance is ultimately measured and evaluated. Research shows more than half of managers don't set effective goals. My own perspective is that establishing meaningful, measurable and mutually agreed-upon goals is well worth whatever time managers put into them.
Communication: Simply put, I never met a good manager who wasn't also a good communicator. Open, transparent communication is fundamental to sound management, and studies show it's a vital element of employee engagement. Yet the reality is many managers are at best reluctant communicators. I'm convinced part of the problem stems from the way managers are commonly chosen: promoted into the role for being a department's best technical specialist. That's not to say individuals promoted this way can never be good managers; sure they can. However -- and this is a big however -- it's always worth bearing in mind that interpersonal skills more than technical skills (think psychologist, coach, policeman etc., as noted at the outset) are what the job most requires.
Thoughts? I look forward to hearing readers' ideas and perspectives...
* * *
Victor is author of The Type B Manager: Leading Successfully in a Type A World.
