Management, as we traditionally think of it, says Dan Pink, author of such works on work as A Whole New Mind, is a great way to get compliance. But it’s proved to be a terrible way to get engagement.
If leaders should be expected to define the culture that generates employee engagement, managers are responsible for taking that culture to the employees.
And if what Pink says is true, we need a change in management style.
May I suggest the following:
Distinguish leadership from management. Leading inspires by providing emotion and reason that “pulls” people to desired accomplishments. Management motivates by providing direction and discipline that “pushes” people to fulfill work expectations.
Expect managers to incorporate leadership. Nothing wrong with some kick-in-the-seat-of-the-pants motivation. But industrial psychologists know that inspiration works better, longer. James Krohe, Jr. says:
Industrial psychologists have long understood that few workers are motivated to excel by pizza parties, bonuses, lunches with the boss, employee-of-the-month awards, or even the promise of annual raises. What does motivate [inspire?] workers is work: interesting work, useful work, work that challenges them, work whose completion satisfies both ego and the social self. (The Conference Board Review, Summer)
Let managers allow creativity. Dynamic leaders are creative leaders. Exceptional managers manage creatively. A leader/manager owes it to her employees to let them freely work their creativity. Google allows software engineers to spend as much as 20% of their time engaging in this-might-work creativity. 3M did something similar back in the ’30’s. The results are that 100% of the expected work does get done, plus ideas, initiatives, and inspirations are generated.
Management need not be an obstacle to engaging employees. Allowing managers to exert leadership that is creative, inspiring pretty well promises more engagement.
Tags: Employee Engagement, Leadership, Management
