Management Derailment

My good friend and colleague Joe Black sent me a copy of a revised chapter on Management Derailment soon to be published in the American Psychological Association Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Sheldon Zedeck (Editor). The chapter is authored by Joyce and Robert Hogan, experienced personality assessment specialists.

When managers fail, the cost to the organization has been estimated between $ 500,000 and $ 1,000,000. Beside the dollar cost, managerial incompetence has a major impact on people because of the misery that it dispenses.

What is competency?

Multiple leadership competency studies have identified four broad categories of competency:

1. Intrapersonal skills: self-awareness and self-control, emotional maturity, integrity

2. Interpersonal skills: social skill, empathy, and relationship development

3. Business skills: ability to plan, organize, monitor, and use resources

4. Leadership skills: ability to build and maintain a team, lead through others

More folks derail because they lack emotional and/or social intelligence than business or leadership skills. This is a personal statement based on many years of observation.

A recent example: A reorganization of a multinational company following a restructuring of operations. The executives who were not retained fell into two categories: (1) their jobs were combined with others or (2) their job was taken over by someone else.

In the latter case, it was obvious that the principal reason was their poor or lack of effective intrapersonal or interpersonal behavior. These people had low respect from their staff and colleagues. They were seen as incapable of working effectively with others or their personal integrity was questionable. This pattern often repeats itself in reorganizations where familiar relationships are disrupted and "chickens come home to roost", so to speak.

Back to the chapter ...

The authors go on to explore in some detail the dark side of personality. These are the factors that define the personality profile:

1. Excitable. When feeling mistreated, these people erupt in emotional displays that might involve yelling, throwing things, and slamming doors. They can be quite volatile and unpredictable. They have difficulty building and maintaining a team. At their best, they have a great capacity for empathy. At their worst, they require a lot of personal attention and reassurance,and they can be very hard to please.

2. Skeptical. These people expect to be betrayed, cheated, or deceived in some way. When detected, they might respond with physical violence, accusations, or litigation, actions announcing that they are ready to defend themselves. They can be insightful about organizational politics and the motives of counter players. They can also be unable to compromise or trust others.

3. Cautious. Highly cautious people fear being criticized, blamed, or possibly disgraced. As a result, they avoid making mistakes that might cause public embarassment. To avoid criticism, they follow the rules and precedents, resist innovation, and cling to past successes. They are prudent and careful about evaluating risk; they rarely make rash or ill-advised moves. They can also resist change, stall, drag their feet, and become undecisive.

4. Reserved. Highly reserved people are seen as indifferent to the expectations of others, especially their staff. As a results, they seem formal, aloof, introverted, and lacking in social insight. They seem more interested in data and things that people. They communicate poorly. They are tough in the face of adversity. They can also be tactless, imperceptive, and gauche.

5. Leisurely. These people seem overly pleasant and cooperative, but in private they expect to be mistreated and unappreciated. They are stubborn and independent, cynical about the talents and intentions of others -- especially superiors -- and insist on maintaining their own pace. They can be very good interpersonally, on one hand, and on the other, they are peevish and stubborn, prefering to stick to their own agenda and to not support others'.

6. Arrogant. These folks expect to be admired, praised, indulged, and obeyed. They expect to be successful at everything they do, they believe their own propaganda, and when frustrated they can explode in narcissitic rage. At their best, they are energetic, charismatic, leader-like, and willing to take the initiative. They are fearless and entrepreneurial. On the negative side, they can be arrogant, demanding, self-deceived, and pompous. Because of their aspirational character, they attract followers. But they also can take credit for more success than warranted. They are slow in admitting their errors and slow to learn from experience. Ultimately, they can alienate their subordinates and colleagues.

7. Mischievous. These types expect others to find them charming, clever, even irresitable. As a result, they are willing to ask for help from others without incurring obligations. They see themselves as bullet-proof. They like to live on the edge. They are seen as being bright, witty, and engaging. They see others as utilities to be exploited. At their best, they are confident and daring that others find attractive and intriguing. At their worst, they are impulsive, reckless, faithless, exploitative, and manipulative.

8. Colorful. Colorful people expect others to find them attractive and entertaining, and the natural focus of attention. They are good at being the center of attention by making dramatic entrances and exits. They perform well in interviews. But they are impulsive and unpredictable. While they might be good in sales, they can be poor managers because they are unfocused, distractible, over-committed, and always in search of the spotlight. At their best, they are bright, entertaining, flirtatious, and the life of the party. At their worst, they will not listen or plan.

9. Imaginative. These people see the world in different and often interesting ways, and they thrive on entertaining others with their unusual perceptions and insights. They are alert to new ways of seeing, thinking, and expressing themselves, and they enjoy the reactions they elicit in others. They seem bright, insightful, playful, and innovative, but also as eccentric, odd, and flighty. At their best, they can be visionary, creative, and insightful. At their worst, they can be self-absorbed, insensitive to feedback, and indifferent to the social and political consequences of their egocentric focus. They are poor communicators, and they can leave people confused regarding their directions or intentions.

10. Diligent. These folks expect their performance to be rigorously evaluated. They have high standards of performance for themselves and others. They are hard working, careful, and planful. They live by the rules and expect others to do the same. They can be irritated when others do not follow the same rules. At their best, these people are good role models who uphold the highest standards of professionalism. They are popular with their bosses because they are so reliable. On the other side, they can be fuzzy, particular, nit-picking micro-managers who alienate their staff.

11. Dutiful. These people think that others expect them to behave well. They are concerned with being accepted, being liked, and getting along, especially with authority figures. They are alert to signs of disappoval and look for ways to ingratiate themselves, to be of service, to demonstrate fealty and loyalty to the organization. At their best, they are polite, and eager to please. They seldom criticise others and they do not make enemies. But at their worst, they have problems making decisions, taking the initiative, or taking stands. Therefore, they can drift to the detriment of their staff.

These 11 items can be broken down into two categories. The first five identify characteristics of people who move away from people, and the last six as characteristics of people who move toward people. There is no one best category. They all have strengths and weaknesses. Some perhaps are more appropriate than others in special circumstances.

None of us are either one or the other, I believe. We are rather a combination of these characteristics. Surely some of the characteristics are stronger and more dominant while others are weaker and less discernable.

So where do you fit in? What is your exposure to derailment? What can you do to mitigate your risks?