One of the things I struggle with most as a manager is getting my employees to do what I tell them to do. I don’t often have to play “the boss” and insist they do things my way. But on those rare occasions I do it’d be nice if they complied, no questions asked. They’re highly skilled and exceptional employees otherwise, and I appreciate the fact that they care about their work enough to think these things through for themselves. But as part of the management team, I’m often privy to information that simply makes my way the best. How do I get them to understand? All of this back and forth seems like a big waste of time to me, but nor do I want to seem like an a**hole… – Name withheld
I believe it was Henry Ford who once said:
“Why is it that every time I ask for a pair of hands, they come with a brain attached?”
Like you, in other words, managers throughout history have lamented the fact that workers don’t always do what you tell them to do, when you tell them to do it, and in the way you think it should be done. They question, doubt, push back, and sometimes even disagree. And it isn’t difficult to imagine, as you point out, the time and effort (and patience) that might be saved if you didn’t have to cajole, convince, plead with, or possibly even threaten them just to get them to obey.
But is this really what you want? And, perhaps more importantly, is that what’s in the best interests of your organization?
Consider that what probably convinced you and/or your employer’s management to hire the individuals it did in the first place wasn’t their capacity to behave like mere automatons. Instead, it was likely their skill, talent, and expertise – not to mention their potential to problem solve, adapt, be creative, work independently and perhaps even “think outside the box.” As you admit, you appreciate seeing some of these qualities in your employees now.
So keep in mind all that can’t be turned on and off like a faucet just because it’s convenient for you. That would be to lose out on an enormous amount of productive potential – potential that is really your organization’s only hope for survival in a competitive marketplace.
Back in Ford’s day, pioneering organizational theorist and management consultant Mary Parker Follett was thinking deeply about the idea of “giving orders,” and the difficulties employers face convincing workers to obey them. What she concluded is that they both should instead obey the “law of the situation,” as she put it. Together, they should work to identify what is in the organization’s best interests in any given circumstance depending on the demands of the market. Figure that out, she argued, and the giving of “orders” becomes unnecessary:
“One person should not give orders to another person, but both are simply part of the situation…. Both [should] accept the orders given by the situation.”[1]
For you, this means embracing that which you seem inclined to resist. Whenever and wherever possible share as much information with your employees as you can. Then engage in the sort of thoughtful debate that is almost sure to lead to the best possible resolution.
That may seem like a waste of time, but I assure it’s not.
Not only are you more likely to make better decisions because (1) more people are involved in making them, and (2) those closest to the problem are often best suited to solve it. You’ll also be getting the buy-in you need from your employees to see things through because they participated in the process. That in turn will increase its likelihood of achieving the desired outcome. And you’ll also be building trust – so when you do need those you manage to do as you say, no questions asked, they’ll be more willing to take your word for it and comply.
Besides, what’s your alternative? Manipulating your workers in some way? Follett had some thoughts on that too:
“…if employers can learn how to manipulate employees, employees can learn how to manipulate employers, and where are we then?”[2]
So let the “law of the situation” be your guide. To do otherwise is to risk more than just being perceived as an a**hole. Your employees’ motivational levels are at stake, as well as their problem solving potential and creative capacity – and therefore the very well-being of your business.
Sometimes I wonder how Ford and other American automakers would have fared had they realized their factory “hands” did come with a brain attached – especially when faced with the competition from Japanese car manufacturers in the 1980s. As one former GM worker observed around that time:
“I guess I got laid off because I make poor quality cars. But in sixteen years, not once was I ever asked for a suggestion as to how to do my job better. Not once.”[3]
Talk about squandered potential.
NOTES:
[1] Follett, Mary Parker. Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett. Editors: Henry Metcalf and L. Urwick, eds. 1940 (Harper and Brothers Publishers), p. 59. (Page number refers to 2013 edition by Martino Publishing.)
[2] Follett, Mary Parker, op. cit., p. 253.
[3] Peters, Thomas and Robert Waterman. In Search of Excellence. 1982 (HarperBusiness Essentials Edition, published 2004), p. 252.
