The Dissonance of Leadership in Middle Management

Who are the unhappiest workers in the US workforce? Assembly line workers? Public CEOs who are under analysts’ microscopes? High stakes entrepreneurs? Research says that Middle Managers are the most unhappy population in the US workforce. But why?

Middle managers are the most unhappy population

It’s because they are the lynchpin between two parts of the organization and in most organizations it feels like the wheels are about to fly right off.

Leaders’ primary responsibilities fall into one of three organizational systems: 1) Strategic, 2) Coordinating, or 3) Operating. Leaders in the strategic system (those at the top of the house) must focus on external trends and set competitive, marketplace positioning. Leaders in the Coordinating system translate those longer-range bets into actionable objectives, applying and managing available resources to achieve those objectives. Leaders in the Operating system (the front line) execute tactical plans to produce products and services for their consumers and end-users. So then by definition, Middle Managers must lead through the inherent dissonance of their Coordinating responsibilities …

Middle Managers responsibilities

  • Following superiors and leading subordinates;
  • Implementing requirements for change and dealing with lack of commitment to it;
  • Planning intended outcomes and translating that intent;
  • Identifying current state and forecasting future requirements;
  • Reviewing past successes and forging precedent-setting leadership;
  • Recognizing competing stakeholder needs and creating one, aligned way forward.

It is stressful and taxing to lead through such dissonance. It’s hard to hold it all together and yet an organization’s ability to realize its strategy rests squarely on middle management (a demographic that experiences high turnover and little development). They lead the Coordinating system and must constantly exhibit ambidextrous, Gumby-like leadership. You must be prepared to be pulled in numerous directions, by multiple (often competing) stakeholders while at the same time create a collective, coherent way forward.

Coaching a middle manager

Do you remember the game Telephone? One-person whispers a phrase in the ear of another person and little by little the message makes its way around the circle until it gets to the last person who blurts it out. Often the final message bears no resemblance to the original message. To work the metaphor, in a 10-person circle one Middle Manager is responsible for the message-passing of those 8-middle level employees! If only leadership in real life was as funny as the game.

I was recently coaching a Middle Manager perpetuating the game of telephone with his team. Senior leadership had pushed for a more transparent operating environment. This leader knew it was the right move, but also knew it required him to make significant changes. Suffice it to say, it required new levels of financial transparency and information sharing he had historically held close to the vest. He believed this “close to vest” approach increased his value, as well as that of his team. He acknowledged his superior’s push and agreed to be more transparent. Yet not more than a week passed when he found himself with his team, praising a culture of transparency while at the same time encouraging them to, “Stay valuable, and not share more than you have to.”  It was a mistake. His internal dissonance got the best of him. The mandate started as, “Encourage transparency. If we’re missing a piece of the plan, we need to know sooner rather than later.” Which translated to, “When the numbers look bad, we look bad.” He has since gone back to his team (and boss) and owned up to the dissonance he created. He’s actively working to retranslate and model the original mandate. Unfortunately, that takes longer than translating effectively the first time. Now his team, and boss, aren’t just listening to what he says, they’re watching how he behaves. They’ll become believers when his actions and words align.

4 ways to lead middle management

If you find yourself wrestling with Middle Management dissonance, take stock and make sure you do the following:

1) Increase the knowledge of those above and below you

The assumption is that you know your stakeholders really well. If not, that’s the place to start. Know what makes them tick; what they care about and how they impact your success. Great translators know their context and have a range of options when translating. Get to know your superiors well enough that you’re capable of effectively translating strategic choices in their absence. Get to know your subordinates well enough to translate those choices in ways that matter to them. Know your options and modulate your translation in genuine, meaningful ways.

2) Lead toward where you need to be, not just where things are

Coordinating leadership requires straddling current business needs and future opportunities. The strategic priorities of superiors often change. Subordinates just want to put their heads down and get to work. I’ve worked with organizations where the number of strategic priorities, or the speed with which priorities change, paralyzes the Coordinating system. When this is the case, you must carve out time to envision where the business is headed, create hypotheses about that future state, and then test them with your superiors. Manage up by pushing superiors to set and adhere to future priorities. Manage down by helping subordinates focus and significantly progress a consistent set of objectives.

3) Get your leaders around the table as early and often as possible

Ensuring the buy-in of front-line leaders impacted by your organization’s strategy is absolutely critical for ensuring they operationalize it. Strategic systems operate largely disconnected from the front line. Middle Managers must create commitment with subordinates who are likely far removed from top-level leaders and the decisions they make. Don’t mistakenly pull superiors into your subordinates’ orbit and thus consume their time with working in the business when they should be working on it. Instead opportunistically pull Operating leaders up by including them, when appropriate, in strategic conversations and discussions where resulting decisions will likely impact them.

4) Break through old mental models and create new versions of success

Promotions to middle management are often based on past accomplishments. Which means you were likely promoted from a system where success was based on technical expertise and executing tactical objectives. However, the Coordinating system requires influencing in the absence of authority, managing interpersonal dynamics and team effectiveness, and unequally applying resources across diverse objectives and stakeholders. You’ll naturally exhibit leadership that made you successful in the past and must actively work to redefine success for this new system. How would you define your top three leadership success metrics for the Coordinating system? How will you ensure you’re not doing your team’s work for them?

Leading Middle Management

Leading in the Coordinating system can be both exhilarating and maddening. You’re often undervalued and heavily relied on.  Just remember – that’s the point and value of your role. As odd as it sounds, you get the privilege of harmonizing the dissonance between the leaders who set direction and those who execute it.

 

Learn more:


Latest Blogs

Filter By Topic

Join Our Newsletter & Learn

Get our latest content delivered to your inbox.

Transform Your Business With Navalent Consulting

Stop fixing the same recurring issues and prepare your organization for long-lasting success.