I read this morning a blog post that discusses the efforts that NYC is undertaking to protect itself from the next Sandy. It's a multi-billion dollar effort and it's admirable to be sure. They're building a 16 foot tall barrier in an effort to curb rising storm waters. Pretty cool stuff - unless - until - there's a 17 foot storm surge. That'll never happen, right?
I've seen and heard plenty of people in IT take this same approach. Sure. For the 10 foot surge, everything is fine. It's that 17 footer that will get you - every time.
Let's say there's an organizational leader named Joe. Joe's operating style is to manage up, and really not expose any strategic reasoning to his employees. This is ok for some, but for most of the advanced team members he's responsible for, they thrive on knowing that what they do on a daily basis matters and is contributing to some higher purpose than simply killing runaway processes or connecting new stuff to infrastructure.
Joe has built a mental 16 foot barrier, hoping to keep the noise from his organization quieter than the noise from other organizations - even within the same larger group. His motto is "Let's suck less than everyone else, and we'll be ok" or put another way "it's ok if someone else fails". I once worked with (notice not for - even though I reported to him) an extraordinary leader whose number one statement was "Never - EVER - let anyone else fail". I've tried to adopt that philosophy in my life, and it really is easier than you might think.
Let's examine for a moment the results of Joe's leadership style:
- This style will always lead to complacency. Contrary to a style of continuous improvement, this style encourages an attitude of "let's just keep the lights on" - and that's the most dangerous of all attitudes in IT.
- Joe's attitude towards his peer organizations will ultimately breed resentment both within and without his group.
- The best and brightest people within Joe's organization will soon grow weary of a stale and ordinary environment like this, and will leave.
- Ultimately, this attitude will result in a failure to perform necessary ongoing maintenance, will lead to failures within infrastructure, and will actually work to have an inverse affect to what Joe was looking for in the first place.
It's my opinion (and opposing opinions are absolutely welcome) that employees are satisfied, even energized when their leader:
- Provides a level of importance to even everyday menial tasks such that employees understand that they are contributing to something real.
- Helps them understand that there is a business impact to what they do. It really doesn't matter WHAT the function of an individual is - there is ALWAYS linkage between what they / you / we do and largest company goals.
- Helps drive their organization to continuous improvement. When leaders adopt a "suck less" approach, employees will adopt that approach as well. When that happens, it's time to go home kids - it leads to ruin - every time.
Joe is a fictional character, but how many times within any kind of organizational leadership have you seen someone with this attitude? How do you overcome such a challenging leadership environment?
Joe isn't a real person - I'm not trying to single out anyone here, but Joe DOES exist. In every organization, there is a Joe. My challenge to anyone that leads people - don't be a Joe.
