Forums

I am in the final running for a managerial position for our newly aligned West Service Center covering everything east of Nebraska (including HI and AK!)

I don't yet know the specifics of the team I would be getting - whether it would be a centralized team in our El Paso office (while I sit in Denver) or whether I would get a smattering of folks all over the West in various company and home offices.

To one extent, [b]I have basic questions about effectively managing remote associates[/b] without being a micromanaging control freak. I'm not a control freak by nature which helps - my theory is that as long as the work's getting done and there aren't any complaints, you're free to manage your time and tasks however you see fit. If there are complaints, we're going to need to review your approach. However, the hiring manager, G, seems to be quite a bit of a control freak and that concerns me. (Not so much personally because I believe I can handle that sort of thing effectively but I worry that I may unintentionally do a "pass-through" of the micromanaging stuff.)

A friend of mine, B, was recently promoted under G and it [i]seems[/i] as though he/G might be a bit of a control freak. As the saying goes, feces rolls downhill. Her/B direct reports are complaining that she's been "all up in their business" and that they "just want her to leave us alone."

B has been 'complaining' that G has been 'reprimanding' her at every turn. She's usually a bubbly, outgoing, confident person but over the last three weeks, she's gotten much more quiet, reserved and unsure of herself. She took the initiative to attend another manager's presentation on our order management system. Apparently "there was this long, cold silence on the other end of the phone and then he told me 'That's not how I do things.'"

To me, eh, tell me once and that's cool. That's level-setting. That's communicating the new rules in the playbook. That's kosher. Tell me repeatedly and keep peeking over my shoulder (even remotely) and I'm going to have a problem with it.

So I'm heading into this thinking [b]"How - as a manager - will I be able to communicate with my remote team in such ways that it won't come across as micromanaging?"[/b]

Currently it seems that all of the managers reporting to G are doing "Monday Morning Huddles" and a daily instant message to the team saying "Good morning!" and this seems to be "overkill" for those new to G's dominion.

In addition, I believe I will reach out to other managers in the various office locations (managers reporting outside of G's chain of command) to ensure that any folks I may have in those locations will feel comfortable approaching an on-site manager for any sorts of emergencies or general questions.

Meanwhile, I'm guessing there's a non-zero chance that I will end up with at least one person working from a home office which means they won't have direct access to any fellow associates, managers, supplies, etc. Granted they've probably been working from the home-office for a while however I do want to have a team feeling - [b]so that people feel comfortable going to each other for help, coming to me for support and/or guidance, making sure they don't feel stranded or forgotten.[/b]

B has said she tried to get volunteers for her "Fun Committee" and there were no takers. Apparently she was trying to inspire a team feeling and it failed. It may have been her approach, the concept itself or the people on that particular team.

As I head into my final interview for this gig, I suppose [b]I'm looking for insight and wisdom from ya'll who may have managed remote associates before. What kind of tips do you have? What are the danger zones? What have you seen that works? [/b]

Thanks in advance - I know ya'll are just chock-full of great insights!

bflynn's picture

Two general suggestions - the same rules apply as if you were managing a teleworker.

1) You can't overdo communciations with remote people. Communciations is about open pathways to send and receive information. There's no such thing as too much in the office and that goes double for remote. You should also visit each site for face to face as often as practical.

2) Manage by output. The people working must be results focused or they're not good candidates to work remotely. If they're not, save both yourselves a lot of heartache now and replace/move them.

Brian

ashdenver's picture

Brian, I agree entirely about your second point! A remote worker generally needs to be a self-starter and find motivation within themselves -- whether through higher productivity or acceptable productivity in shortest times or taking on additional projects or whatever floats their boat. If they can't find it within themselves, they're not going to have a manager standing over their desk telling them "do this now, do that next, finish this other thing before you quit for the day."

What concerns me is the communication aspect. I can send emails and chat via instant message and on the phone (last choice) all day long. However, what I'm seeing as I watch B try to manage her team is that her folks are extremely results oriented and they are balking at the incessant barrage of incoming communication - team meetings or huddles, O3s, emails, IMs - they're saying it's interfering with their productivity.

I think there's some level of concern that an IM or a phone call from a manager is considered "checking up on" the team. Like if you don't respond instantly, you're screwing off and you get a demerit. There's some sort of perception (from B's team) that they're constantly under surveillance through all the communication and, by default, untrusted.

Knowing every team is different, I may not face the same challenges but I would like input on how ya'll handle "constant communication" without raising suspicions and fears.

(In B's team, there are a couple of folks that "home-shore" and I'm guessing if I get a team with some home-shored folks, visiting their locations might be a bit awkward! LOL)

bflynn's picture

[quote="ashdenver"]
....

I think there's some level of concern that an IM or a phone call from a manager is considered "checking up on" the team. Like if you don't respond instantly, you're screwing off and you get a demerit. There's some sort of perception (from B's team) that they're constantly under surveillance through all the communication and, by default, untrusted.

....

(In B's team, there are a couple of folks that "home-shore" and I'm guessing if I get a team with some home-shored folks, visiting their locations might be a bit awkward! LOL)[/quote]

On the first paragraph...if this is happening, the reason is a lack of focus on the output. People don't feel like they're being checked up on with output focused management. They feel that way with process focused management. Also, don't confuse quantity with quality. I know the saying is "There's no such thing as too much communciations", but there such a thing as too much annoyance. If the team is reacting this way, I suspect one of the two - either its frequent low quality communciations or it is a focus on process. Example - "Hey, just checking how its going" is process related. Results focused people, especially a high-D may respond "Just fine until I get interruptions like these that slow me down!"

On the second - have the people working at home come to you....once a quarter for a week is good, more often is better. It will do them good to be in a central location, talk with each other and to be seen by others in the organization....it is good for their careers. Work the travel costs into a future budget and get everyone together when you can.

Brian

ashdenver's picture

Brian, I hate to pick your brain further but you've intrigued me with this distinction you're making between Output Focus and Process Focus. Is there any chance you could give me a handful of examples of differences between these two things?

I'll give it a try first ...

Process: "How's it going?"
Output: "What do you need to get this Widget setup on time?"

Process: "Is your Job Journal up to date?"
Output: "I need your Job Journal updated by the end of the day please."

Process: "I need a volunteer to take care of this escalated issue. Any takers?"
Output: "Sally, your Job Journal indicates you have bandwidth to assist this client with this issue. Please let me know if you encounter any snags, thanks!"

I'm sorry if I'm way off the mark on this. I suppose I'm having difficulty defining "output" over "process."

This place is VERY process-oriented, especially right now with our realignment and required adherence to the new 'Smart Standards' so that we're all following the same processes across the country. Given the huge focus across-the-board with the shift in processes, I'd [i]really [/i]like to get a handle on how to shift process-communications into output-communications.

bflynn's picture

I think you're close to the difference.. Essentially, when someone is remote, you CAN'T keep an eye on then to make sure they're working, so don't try. Look at the work they produce, not how they do it. Even some specific goals, like updating a work journal, are really process related no matter how you state them. I presume the work journal is part of your communications toolset, so updating it isn't a goal, its just you setting how they work. If they're not updating it, there's a feedback opportunity.

I think your first example is pretty good. IMO the second are both process related - work journals are process related, they're stories about the work you do. However, a goal to update the journal by 5pm is a good MT goal. The third is really delegation.

You focus on what they produce. Look, they might be brilliant and only have to work 2 hours a day to do the work of 2 people. You don't care, you're interested in their output.

Think clear MT goals and let them achieve those goals however they need to. Not - "did you write code for 8 hours today?" Instead "did you deliver the new software module today?"

As to communications, I've used a simple weekly goal list out to the team, everyone knows everyone else's goals. Sometime I followed up individual with more detail for specific important tasks, but generally not. My message is - this is what you need to get done this week. Do it.

I also like a 10 minute standup meeting in the afternoon - for remote this is obviously a con call. Each participant gives two pieces of information: They report impediments to their work (or that there are none) and they give a 2 sentence summary of the work they've done that day. Quick around the room and its done, usually not two minutes. In that time I get a feeling on where people are and if I think they're behind, I'll follow up later.

That is it - focus on the big goals. Make new little MT goals every week. Set a structure that give ownership for accomplishment to the individual and forces them to check in on a daily basis.

That's really all the communications that is needed.

Brian

ashdenver's picture

This is where my challenge comes in, I think. We [i]have [/i]to be process oriented right now. [u]It's not optional[/u]. We are being mandated by Corporate to enforce adherence to these new Smart Standard processes on every single task and project. The tasks need to be completed in the listed order and in the prescribed format, within the stipulated deadlines.

The "job journal" is actually a "project tracking" database thing. It basically holds the Planned Start Date. The dates need to be maintained accurately, even when it involves guessing and fortune-telling. If, on January 1st, Suzie's dates indicate that she will start $50k worth of business in the month of February and then six clients back out because of problems caused by others in other departments and eight other clients postpone their starts until April so they can get through their audits and Suzie really only starts $25k, Suzie is going to be held accountable for that. There will be a "come to Jesus" meeting about how inaccurate her start dates were, even if she updated her dates in the most timely fashion she possibly could. She is expected to know in the first half of January what will start for the entire month of February.

Things that I think are "simple big goals" like "communicate with your clients, prevent escalations, stay timely" are dictated. Form letters must be used. All communications must be logged into two systems (systems A & M). All dates must be updated in a total of three systems (systems M, G & E).

My soon-to-be boss is, shall we say, "detail oriented" which means he's constantly running reports and auditing these systems to ensure all the employees in his organization are adhering to the minutae behind the output. For a five minute phone call, it can take another 10 mins to update all the appropriate systems and log the required notes. If there is a lot of back-and-forth in email, the System A "case" can fill up quickly which means that case has to be closed, a new one opened and System E updated.

My new boss has already asked everyone in his organization to "report to their own manager" anyone on other teams who hasn't followed a process so it can be addressed and we can enforce adherence to these processes. (Don't even get me started.)

If the bulk of my communications to my team are going to be:

- "Make sure you have System E updated by 5pm today."
- "Please update these outstanding dates by the end of the week."
- "Please confirm the attached report accurately reflects your forecast for the following month and return your results to me by Wednesday."
- "Make sure you are updating System G daily by 5pm local."
- "Provide me with your tattle list no later than Friday each week."

I swear, everyone's going to be downright miserable. (We're already starting on that path throughout this man's organization, I can see it happening already.)

I guess the challenge for me (and them) will be shifting perspective from "setting up the business is your only measurable output" to "the business being setup is only one output metric and we will focus on this much-longer list as well." As far as most folks around here are concerned, the stuff that touches the client is the output and the rest is internal silliness that should be either optional or eradicated entirely. I guess it'll be my job to reinforce the message that "this back-end goofiness is really output as well."

I'm concerned that constant communication along the lines of "here's something else you didn't do, here's one more thing you're behind on, here's something else to keep track of" will demoralize the heck out of people. [u]Would these types of things be better suited to structured communications[/u]? Monday is System A day; Tuesday is System E day; etc. That way it's mostly confined to an expected communication rather than "blind-siding" them at random intervals each time something new comes up. (I would love to come up with a Weekly Report that would just cover all the items and be strictly factual but I don't think that will fly at this point.)

bflynn's picture

[quote="ashdenver"]
....

If the bulk of my communications to my team are going to be:

- "Make sure you have System E updated by 5pm today."
- "Please update these outstanding dates by the end of the week."
- "Please confirm the attached report accurately reflects your forecast for the following month and return your results to me by Wednesday."
- "Make sure you are updating System G daily by 5pm local."
- "Provide me with your tattle list no later than Friday each week."

...
[/quote]

As to your company's Project Management plan....Wow. This would easily drive me away from that company. Assuming you don't plan to do that, you have to get on board. Otherwise, for your own good, you should start looking for something else.

The deadlines don't need to be communciated on a frequent basis. You probably should have a published weekly schedule; then your communciations on the topic can be "This is there and you are responsible for it." You'll have to check up on each individual, but you don't have to talk with them every day about it.

Focus your efforts on the work, even more strongly now. Make your communciations even more focused on the work.

If you get questions from above about the methodology...I can't help a lot. Obviously you don't like it, but don't ignore your bosses flashing red light. Personally, I might say something like me not finding it useful or that it sometimes (frequently?) gets in the way of getting work done. However, doing that more than once or twice is a step toward the door.

Brian