A system of managing

The trick is not to create a 32-hour day, but rather to focus on the activities that are the Vital Few—and to learn to ignore the Trivial Many. Thus, the solution to the dilemma is not to search for more hours, but to accomplish the things that are essential while ignoring the time-wasting activities.

The best way that we know to provide company-wide focus on the Vital Few is to employ a system of managing—a consistent set of procedures and principles that guide us to do the Right Things Right. This management system must focus everyone on their goals while allowing flexibility and choice on how the goals will be accomplished. It also provides a common language to everyone, compelling them to communicate in ways that are harmonious with the company’s vision and goals. And it must compel everyone to avoid the Trivial Many.

We readily admit that there are many ways to manage a company, some of which are actually successful, and some of these successful ways are themselves widely divergent in their nature. They range from tightly controlled autocracies to seemingly unstructured organizations. For example, imagine how different the management system at Apple must be from Wal-Mart.

We’ll describe here a proven and effective system of managing, a system that can be applied to virtually any company. This system provides at least three benefits by:

1. Focusing everyone on goals all the time.

2. Providing everyone with clear guidelines.

3. Rewarding everyone when the company goals are achieved.

A Client Story

Years ago, we met with a company in steep decline. It had once been quite successful, but it had not adapted to changes in its marketplace.

It was quickly obvious that this company was experiencing managerial chaos, and that the current managers did not know how to turn things around. Although many firms exhibit some of the behaviors we saw, this new client was in real trouble.

First, they had no means of tracking or managing their progress in attaining any goals. And the goals themselves were only vaguely defined (such as, “make more sales”).

Second, they had no mechanism for aligning the managers and staff to do “the right things right” every day. The managers all worked hard, and they wanted to achieve success, both for the company and themselves. But every week was a mystery on how to achieve success—they were in a perpetual cycle of get the work done, get more work, hope for a good outcome. They were in a hamster wheel.

Third, the overall quality of communications among the managers and staff was poor: it was infrequent, unfocused, and open-ended. Many times, people walked into a meeting wondering what it was about and then walked away wondering if anything had been accomplished. Some of the same topics seemed to be recycled time and again.

Fourth, the managers and staff didn’t communicate well about the specifics of what needed to be done. The managers continually complained about employees who didn’t do what they should, and the employees complained about lack of clarity and changes in direction.

Fifth, the managers were inconsistent about their accountability. Despite their titles and perceptions about their positions, they frequently had conflicts with each other about what they should accomplish. And these conflicts were often situational in nature—they surfaced when a problem emerged, and they were discussed in an emotionally charged atmosphere.

Sixth, despite the great depth of experience and knowledge among the managers, they didn’t often share their insights with others in a productive or non-confrontational way. Instead, they used their knowledge as an argumentative weapon rather than a tool for collective productivity.

As the old saying goes, “Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?” This was a company that needed a System of Management.

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
3.142.171.64