Many managers I’ve worked with reside at either end of the spectrum: They are either hands-off or the micromanager.  The best managers I know understand that they cannot be locked into a single position, and rather move up and down the scale as the situation requires.  They know for example, that when a team is coming together and a new project is underway that more oversight is required, and when everything is humming, and stepping back up is entirely appropriate.  My intent here is not to address the different types of leadership, but to point out that the higher people rise  in the corporate chain, the more delegation is required and the more removed they are from the daily functions and issues of the business.

Have you noticed how everyone goes out of their way that no issues exist when the boss stops by for a visit?  Think about that lack of clarity working up the chain: everyone is generally reluctant to identify problems feeling it reflects badly on them and this sterilization of the issues is only compounded up the chain of command.  To manage effective, all the information must be available, and as that is generally an impossibility, developing ways to improve the fact flow are in order.  Having a sterile environment to operate from, – think about it – how many layers of tweaking are in volved before the message reaches the top level of management  - force company leader’s to react to whatever facts are handed out by the manager’s subordinates. A classic and humorous take is provided below in The Creation:

To further complicate the situation, its not just the messages we get from those that work for us.  Wason (1972), a cognitive psychologist make it his life’s goal to learn how people search for information and evidence.  He found that up to 90% of the information we search for aims to support the views and beliefs we hold dear.  So if we have a concept to improve production we seek out information to support that idea.  In experiments, people tend to remember information that supports our beliefs about 100% of the time, and those pesky negative data points only about 40% of the time.  Interestingly, skeptics remember both supporting and discomforting information equally well at about 90% in both cases.

Suggestions:

• Maintain those relationships throughout the corporate ladder.
• Develop and nurture relationships at all levels of the organization
• Do not seek out feedback only when a problem appears to exist.
• Be mindful of the tendency to skew information
• Keep skeptics around, they’ll help give a clearer perspective than the “yes” people

Knowledge is power, and understanding what you have and the biases involved are just as critical.

The Creation

In the beginning was the plan
and then came the assumptions
and the assumptions were without form
and the plan was completely without substance
and the darkness was upon the faces of the workers.
And they spake  upto their group heads, saying:
“Its a crock of shit, and it stinketh.”
And the group heads went unto their section heads and sayeth:
“It is a pail of dung, and none may abide the odor thereof.”
And the section heads went unto their managers and sayeth unto them:
“It is a container of excrement, and it is very strong, and none may abide by it.”
And the managers went to their Directors, and sayeth unto them:
“It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide its strength.”
And the Directors went their Vice President and sayeth:
“It contains that which aids plant growth, and it is very strong.”
And the Vice Presidents went to the president, and sayeth unto him:
“It promotes growth and is very powerful.”
And the President went to the Chairman and sayeth unto him:
“This powerful new plan will activley promote the growth and
efficiency of the company and this area in particular.”
And the Chairman looked upon the plan, and saw that it was good
and the plan became policy.

~ Anonymous