If You're A Leader ... Lead

If the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?

— I Corinthians 14:8

   How much is written, and yet how little seems to be understood, about the subject of leadership? It takes little imagination to conceive that the best organized endeavor, equipped with the finest materials, following the latest methods, and backed with adequate financial support, would be critically hampered without the leadership required to combine all of these elements into an effective endeavor.

   If leadership is that important, how much do we know about it? Curiously, the answer appears to be — not much. The reason according to Jack Taylor in How to Select and Develop Leaders,¹ is that leadership involves people and

Page 136

we don't know much about people. An authority in the field of leadership and management development, Taylor lists many pages of selected definitions of leadership by recognized experts. Few bear more than passing resemblance to the others.

   While we have discussed various leadership styles (from autocratic to participative), we have said nothing about what might be called its qualities (such as drive, initiative and persistence). Some have written about what leaders should be (decisive, fair, etc.)., while others have surveyed what "followers" sought in their leaders (thoughtfulness, honesty, proficiency, etc.). Some experts have studied what leaders should know (human relations, management principles, organization objectives, etc.) and what they should do (think creatively, plan, organize, follow-up, etc.).

   The list of definitions is never-ending, it seems, and each appears to be as valid as the next. For our purposes the "leading" with which we are concerned is that function of management defined by Louis Allen as "the work a manager performs to cause people to take effective action^."2 He breaks this function into five component activities — decision-making, communicating, motivating, selecting, and developing.

DECISION-MAKING

   As with other management skills, that of decision-making has undergone much scrutiny in recent years. Many books and articles have been written on the subject. Consulting firms specializing in the areas of problem-analysis and decision-making have developed within a matter of a few short years. More and more seminars and definitive treatments of the subject of management deal with this area at some point. It is called by some the most critical of all management skills.

Page 137

   In their systematic approach to decision-making, Charles Kepner and Benjamin Tregoe enunciate seven basic concepts involving a number of procedures:³

1. Setting objectives against which to choose.

2. Classifying objectives as to importance.

3. Developing alternatives from which to choose.

4. Evaluating alternatives against objectives to make a choice.

5. Choosing the best alternative as a tentative decision.

6. Assessing adverse consequences from the choice.

7. Controlling effects of the final decision.

    Many have commented particularly on new insights gained from the first two concepts. Asking themselves "What do I want to accomplish and in what relative priority?" has caused many to face these crucial questions for the first time. While not promising to give easy answers, the authors do claim for this system the significant benefit of providing a system for marshalling a large body of data concerning multiple alternatives in a fashion that permits comparison against a range of objectives of varying importance.

   Managers who have studied this and other decision-making processes are finding that they provide not only an extremely valuable tool to assist in their own managerial choices but also a framework within which to question subordinates regarding their basic procedures in arriving at their decisions. The asking of the right questions concerning objectives, for example, at the right time can be a most effective form of leadership.

   Not the least of the advantages of having a system is the time saved by eliminating needless forays into irrelevant areas. The sharpening of objectives at the outset provides a

Page 138

profitable guide to relevant as opposed to irrelevant pursuits.

   While the list of helpful hints for making decisions could be long, and involved, there are several which have warranted comment by many writers on the subject:

1. Don't make decisions under stress. It's better to delay a decision than to make it when you're angry, upset or under great pressure.

2. Don't make snap decisions. The spur-of-the-moment decisions are merely guesses unless they are backed up by adequate data.

3. Don't drag your feet. The decision must be made sometime. Putting it off usually results in adding it to an already overflowing inventory of unfinished business.

4. Consult other people, particularly those who will be affected by your decision.

5. Don't try to anticipate everything. You'll never have all the facts, so you'll have to base your actions on those facts available at the time a decision is required.

6. Don't be afraid of making a wrong decision. No one is omniscient. There is risk involved in every decision.

7. Once the decision is made, go on to something else. You gain nothing by worrying about past decisions and you lose the capacity to give your full and dispassionate attention to other importance decisions.⁴

   There are many stumbling blocks in the pathway of effective decision-making. One of the most serious is the apprehension of the risk involved — the fear of making a mistake. "Readiness to risk failure," said George Spaulding, "is probably the one quality that best characterizes the

Page 139

effective executive." All of us recognize the fact that we learn faster through the mistakes we have made. Yet we somehow fail to see the connection between this and the courage required to make a difficult decision. If experience is the best teacher, and we learn by doing, we as managers should welcome the opportunity of making decisions. Particularly should this be so with a loving and understanding Heavenly Father to look to for guidance each step of the way.

   We should review the proverb: "Not failure, but low aim, is sin." Our attitude toward failure may need reexamination. It is difficult to find a great leader whose life was not marked with significant failure. It was what they did with their failures that counted!

   "Who should decide?" you ask. This question is another why of asking at what level decisions ought to be made. It is an important question because you may not have heard of "delegating up." This occurs when your assistant brings a problem, which the employee should be deciding for himself or herself, to you for an answer. When you unwittingly take over and work out this problem, the employee has succeeded in "delegating up." If you were asked the proper level at which that decision ought to have been made, your answer would not only be embarrassing to you, it would be revealing as to your understanding of several areas of leadership.

   The maxim that decisions should be made at the lowest level consistent with good judgment is based on the principles of holding decisions as close as possible to the facts and data upon which they are based. The principles of efficient operation also enters in when considering the uneconomical aspects in use of talent and funds when leaders spend their time making decisions which their assistants are capable of making. In the utility of time, this

Page 140

manager will thus be denying himself time to do other more important things. Caution must be exercised, of course, to insure objectivity. Where emotional factors may exist, those intimately involved in the details of a situation will very possibly lack the objectivity required for sound judgment.

   Certain decisions, although capable of being handled effectively by assistants, may have an important bearing on the overall effectiveness of the organization. Close control over such decisions will be imperative for the executive.

   That decision-making is really a process with identifiable steps has come as a surprise to many managers. Those who manage "by intuition" — and who hasn't at one time or another? — may be inclined to scoff at the idea of analyzing the process of arriving at decisions. "I look at the facts and decide what needs to be done!" is the answer — a common over-simplification — which such people give when queried as to how they make decisions.

   The distinction between decision-making and problem-analysis is commonly overlooked. The two are often confused as when a person facing a choice between alternative courses of action (decision-making) says, "I have a problem. Should I let the office staff go home early today and work Saturday morning, or should I keep them on this afternoon and not call them in Saturday?" This manager faces a decision between alternatives, not a problem in the problem-analysis sense. The most obvious distinction between the two procedures is that problem-analysis produces an explanation that can be verified because the event (or cause) has already taken place. Decision-making produces answers that cannot be verified because the actions will take place in the future, which is always uncertain.

   Most writers do not distinguish between these two

Page 141

procedures. Content to let the term "decision-making" cover both, they do agree on the importance of identifying the real problem. A problem well-stated is half solved. This frequently means first identifying the apparent problem ... then checking the facts carefully (who? what? when? where? why?). Once the real problem is ascertained, possible solutions are generated from which the choice of the best one is made, and a course of action laid out to implement it.

   "Examine the decisions a manager makes," says Allen, "and you see accurately reflected there his ability to reason, his powers of observation, his attitude toward people. His decisions spell him for what he is — positive, logical and forward-looking, or uncertain, confused and defensive. Great undertakings find life in sound and venturesome decisions; failure decides its own illogical and inconsistent grave."⁵

COMMUNICATION

   "There's a lot of communication these days on the subject of communication," commented a participant wearily as he left the conference.

   "Sure is," replied his companion, "but this fellow just doesn't understand our situation."

   The foregoing conversation occurred following a three-day seminar on "Communication." It highlights one of the most interesting aspects of a vital management skill. Allen summarizes it with his opening remark on the subject: "A great deal of information is conveyed about communication without much real understanding taking place as to what is meant."⁶ By defining management-communication as "the work a manager performs to create understanding," Allen bridges the gap where many conferences have floundered.

Page 142

   Immediately following the three-day seminar noted above, an informal critique was held with the conference co-ordinator and three of the participants. When asked what they felt would have improved the conference the most, all three agreed that the answer was probably "better communication." The speaker, a well-known expert in the field, heading a department of communications for a major university, had failed to communicate with his own audience on a subject thoroughly; his theoretical presentation was flawless; but the net effect on his hearers was "He just doesn't understand our situation." This speaker had failed to present his subject in a way that was meaningful to his audience. He had projected facts or knowledge, but not understanding. For his message to have meaning for those who heard, it had to be relevant to their problems. They had to see it in the light of their own situation.

   How often is the physical act mistaken for the final communication? "I delivered the message!" came the angry response to the manager's query as to why a specific request had not been carried out. True, the message had been delivered. Had there been communication? The tone of the voice in the response provides a clue to the probable answer.

   The notice posted on the lunchroom door announcing the shortening of the coffee break periods, with a listing of dubious reasons for the action, could easily be mistaken for communication. The "funny faces" scribbled over it the next morning may bear mute testimony to its failure to establish real understanding.

   The letter written in haste, in anger, or solely from the writer's point of view may be thought of as communication. In reality, it may be wasted effort. Wasted effort. Ah, here's the rub...and perhaps a key to the management of time. Anything that is wasted effort represents wasted

Page 143

time. The best management of our time thus becomes linked inseparably with the best utilization of our efforts. Thus the management of time becomes a matter of how we do what we do all the time.

   Our values systems and emotions have been described as major roadblocks in the pathway of effective communication. They form a sieve through which all attempted communication must pass. The stronger our feelings the more formidable this roadblock becomes. Selective listening is a term which had been applied to this factor which filters all we hear and tunes out everything except what we want to hear.

   Everyone has tried, or heard about, the experiment in communications distortion by a group standing in a circle. A specific message is started from one point and passed from person to person around the group. The comparison of the final version with the original usually provides a source of real entertainment as well as a great lesson. This lesson has not been lost on those charged with responsibility for communications in large corporations who constantly review the levels through which important communications must pass and the possibilities of distortion.

   The importance of the meaning of words, when viewed from the perspective of varying value systems, must be considered. Not the least of our problems lies with the different meanings given by different persons to the same words and phrases. An appreciation of this factor will enable a manager to take significant steps toward insuring more effective communications.

   Of all the factors in communication which are being viewed and reviewed by social scientists, management consultants and chief executives, perhaps none merits critical attention more than the art of listening. Through the valuable contributions of people such as Dr. Ralph

Page 144

Nichols, professor emeritus in the University of Minnesota's Rhetoric Department, and Dr. Wesley A. Wiksell, formerly professor in Louisiana State University's Speech Department, we are seeing for the first time what poor listeners we are; what the main reasons seem to be; and what we can do about it. Who would have thought, before Dr. Nichols enunciated it so clearly, that one of the greatest causes of poor listenership is the failure to capitalize on the difference between the time it takes to say words and the time it takes to think them! Our minds race at two to three times the speed of the spoken word. Thus we are continually "tuning in and out" on the conversation, and frequently staying off the beam so long that we lose the subject and miss some of the key points. The following remedy is suggested: use this time constructively. Evaluate what the speaker is saying; his or her qualifications for saying it; the extent to which the statements are supported by the facts. Anticipate the next point. When the speaker misses a point occurring to you, ask a question to confirm its relevance. What might have been an apathetic response thus becomes one of vital interest, and probable benefit to the speaker.

   Emotional reactions to loaded terms, failure to resist distraction and psychological deaf spots — these may prevent good listening.

   A fatal problem is that of ruling out a subject at the outset as uninteresting or devoid of value. Good listeners have been described as winnowers — listening closely because they are always looking for something that will increase their knowledge and understanding or that they can use in a conversation or a speech. "And his reward," said Roger Farley, formerly of the American Management Association's Management Course, "is that such a listener almost invariably finds it."

Page 145

   Bruce Larson, whose Dare to Live Now!⁷ was described by Catherine Marshall as an honest, provocative, fresh approach to Christianity, asks a most discerning question: Do you communicate without trying? Or do you try without communicating? Noting that people respond more to how we feel about them than to what we say to them, the author points unerringly to the "great mistake we make in thinking that our knowledge or insight is the greatest gift we can give to others." Often we bring them much further, he concludes, when we listen eagerly to what they are trying to say about themselves and their problems. We affirm their worth and dignity by taking them seriously.

   A large industrial concern, convinced that improved employee communication should bring about improved employee relations, decided to look at itself in the mirror.⁸ To each member of management went a questionnaire, designed to be a self-audit for the thoughtful review of executives. Participants were assured that the quiz was planned neither to affront nor embarrass. It was described simply as a "sincere attempt to invite management to evaluate its own performance and see what basic changes or improvements might be made." These are the questions (readers should make their own applications, mindful that profit, unions and size are important factors in the industrial world):

1. Are top management members sincerely interested in the employees, their needs and their problems, or is top management interested exclusively in the profit picture?

2. Do members of top management make a sincere attempt to keep in touch regularly with the rank-and-file viewpoint? Or does it accept (from selected

Page 146

representatives) their interpretation of how employees feel?

3. Do the firm's employees know the members of top management? By name, or possibly just by sight? [This one is obviously phrased more for the big company than the small, but it could come close to home there, too.]

4. Have we (as members of management) made an effort to tell employees about our management problems, and have we ever asked for employees cooperation in solving them? Or do we handicap ourselves by the belief that employees have nothing constructive to contribute?

5. Have we made any real provision for giving our employees useful information regularly — such as bulletin boards, newsletters, face-to-face meetings, supervisory sessions, etc.? Or are we too busy being management officials to care?

6. If we do communicate — in short, if we answer the preceding questions with a Yes — do we check the effectiveness and credibility of what we do and say? Or do we simply take the employees' acceptance of the employer's veracity for granted?

7. Have we, as members of management, introduced a practical, workable method by which employees can get their views to us? Or do we assume that we know instinctively what's on our people's minds?

8. Do our company's employees feel they belong? If the answer is Yes, just what are we doing specifically to make them feel a part of the company? If pressed, could we actually prove it?

9. Does our top management encourage employee participation in a sports program, the credit union, employee brainstorming groups, as well as political

Page 147

and civic activities, just to pick a few at random? Or do we pass over all this with the idea that it has no meaning?

10. Finally, a triple-headed query: Does our company have a satisfactory grievance or complaint facility? Do our people know the appropriate steps to take if the supervisor's decision — or our own — is considered unfair? Does our management actually review the "gripes" that employees make?

The executive author of the questionnaire assured his respondents that this was by no means a complete self-audit for management. He said, however, that the questions "may at least lay a groundwork for reappraisal," and added, "Remember this: An adroit union organizer would have determined all of the points of our vulnerability in every single one of these areas. Frankly, have we?"

MOTIVATION

   How does one get people to do what has to be done? This question, which has been asked since people first worked together to unify their efforts, has yet to be answered definitely. Social scientists in the management field have focused much attention on it recently. Sensitivity-training is designed to make one more aware of the feelings of others. This is surely basic to understanding how to motivate, how to inspire, how to infuse a spirit of willingness to perform effectively.

   For years the most effective motivation in industry was assumed to be the use of arbitrary authority and the threat of its use to withhold benefits or to impose penalties. Time and motion studies became the vogue for maximizing working efficiency. Then came the realization that machinery and processes would run no better than people wanted

Page 148

them to. Slowdowns, strikes, apathy, and disinterest could not be controlled with time and motion studies. The famous studies at the Hawthorne of Western Electric Company showed that simply putting a worker in a test situation provided sufficient interest and stimulation to ensure increased productivity even in the face of increasingly disadvantageous working conditions. Understanding what gives people a feeling of recognition and importance is of primary importance to the manager. People who sense in their leader the ability to help them satisfy their needs will follow willingly and enthusiastically.

   Lack of unanimity in preferred leadership styles reflects, to some degree, difference of opinion over concepts of human relations. The manager who is task-oriented primarily will not consider human relations to be as important a factor in performance as the people-oriented manager. Motivation is affected by such factors as degree of identity between organizational and personal goals, security, sense of fulfillment and accomplishment, relations with associates and superiors, and income requirements.

   Participation in the decision-making process has been identified as a strong factor in motivation of performance. A person who has had a part in developing a policy will be less likely to be critical of it... more likely to support it and to work for its successful implementation. The value of communication in developing motivation has often been overlooked. "Motivation to accomplish results," says Allen, "tends to increase as people are informed about matters affecting these results."

   The importance of these understandings was emphasized by Robert Dubin in his description of organizations as "assemblages of interesting human beings... and the largest assemblages having anything resembling a central

Page 149

coordinative system called management."⁹ Comprehension of the human problems of administration begins with such understanding.

   Among the most important principles of human behavior of interest to managers are:

Behavior depends on both the person and the environment.

Each individual behaves in ways which make sense to that individual.

An individual's perception of a situation influences his or her behavior in that situation.

An individual's self-perception influences what he or she does.

An individual's behavior  is influenced by individual needs, which vary from person to person and from time to time."¹⁰

In articulating these extremely useful principles, Paul Buchanan cautions the manager who wants to understand and work effectively with others to give attention to individuals and to the situation they are in and to the relation between each of them and the situation. The behavior of an individual thus might be changed in any one of three ways: by changing the person through development of skills and knowledge; by assisting the modification of procedures or assignments; or by a combination of these.

   The need to "make sense" out of one's situation and behavior accounts for the origin and spread of rumors when information is not available to employees. They will tend to make up or guess at the facts and to make assumptions as to why the information is withheld. Conclusions that "management is just not interested in us" or

Page 150

"things must not be going well" are drawn much more often than managers realize. Perhaps no single fact of the managerial world makes the need for adequate communication more imperative than this principle. Workers who have access to information about a situation don't have to take time to speculate about what the situation "must be." They can work to accomplish tasks with less likelihood of acting on false assumptions and being plagued with uncertainty and indecision.

   Previous experience is known to be a primary factor in our perception of a situation. Since the individual combinations of one's experience is unique, the result of highly individualistic points of view is inevitable. For the leader this underscores the importance of listening and observing to enhance the likelihood of being able to change behavior. Objective analysis and sympathetic understanding of differing points of view may be the manager's most effective tool in bringing about improved performance of employees.

   Psychologists say that to be completely objective about what we do is impossible. We cannot, they say, remove our inner concerns and self-concept from our actions. We can be more objective by attempting to understand how our actions reflect our own concerns and by taking this into account in our relationship with others. And perhaps more importantly, we should realize that others also will behave in ways that protect and enhance their inner feelings.

   The line from the Gospel melody, "Only to be what He wants me to be... " reflect an innate need of mankind to strive to become what it is possible of becoming (through Christ). Social scientists and philosophers have called this a striving for self-realization. Moving down the scale of the commonly referred-to "Maslow's hierarchy of needs," we find ego needs (sense of self-worth); social needs (belong-

Page 151

ing), security needs (protection from harm, loss of employment); and physiological needs (food, activity, air, sleep). These needs are generally depicted in a hierarchy with physiological needs at the bottom and self-realization at the top, to indicate that a need at one level tends to operate as a primary source of motivation when needs at a lower level are sufficiently satisfied for that person.

   In Christian organizations there appears to be a tendency to assume that motivation must never be examined since this would border on a violation of the admonition not to judge. Not only is this admonition wholly applicable to management of Christian organizations, but the failure to make any effort to understand or to utilize basic human motivation principles may be depriving our organizations of a principal source of energy, enthusiasm, creativity and resourcefulness. This is not to gainsay the great importance of dedication to the Lord's work. Nothing can replace this imperative ingredient. But, assuming that this quality is present, what about the rest? Must we assume they are not important? Or should managers recognize that we are mortals all and that the pursuit of our calling ought to be what Paul Tournier calls "an adventure in living"? When recognition of the established needs of people enables a manager to make one's work more meaningful and more fulfilling, it would seem that to deny him or her these satisfactions could hardly be a part of God's design.

   At this point the question of "manipulation" appears. "How does the manager separate motivating from manipulating?" is a question that has arisen in Christian management seminars. When, for instance, might a request to a mailing-room clerk to stay overtime for several hours, couched in terms intended to persuade the clerk to want to perform this unattractive task, be viewed as manipulative rather than motivational? While it seems that this is one of

Page 152

the questions to which there are no simple answers, some guidelines may be suggested. Where the ultimate objectives of the organizations are clearly spelled out, where department goals have been articulated and reconciled directly with the overall objectives, and where the employee's ultimate commitment and personal goals are in accord with these objectives, such problems should be answerable.

   In the "how to" area of motivating employees, we sometimes learn from cautions of what not to do. One of the best summaries of how to "demotivate" employees comes from Dr. M. M. Feinberg, an industrial psychologist and personnel consultant.¹¹

1. Never belittle a subordinate. (Destroys sense of self-worth and initiative.)

2. Never criticize a subordinate in front of others. (This temptation appears under pressure. Destroys rapport.)

3. Never fail to give subordinates your undivided attention. (Personal, undivided attention from time to time is imperative. Self-respect disappears with the realization that the boss will never give this.)

4. Never seem preoccupied with your own interests. (Gives impression of selfishness and of manipulation of others for our own purposes.)

5. Never play favorites. (Quickly destroys morale of group).

6. Never fail to help your subordinate grow. (The feeling that the boss is one who fights for the people is a great motivator. Inform them of openings, opportunities, and never hold them back out of self-interest.)

7. Never be insensitive to small things. (What may

Page 153

seem insignificant to you may be extremely important from the employees' perspective.)

8. Never embarrass weak employees. (While toleration of weakness in a key position often destroys the initiative of strong people, the manager must take care to never deal with this problem through causing embarrassment.)

9. Never vacillate in making a decision. (Indecision at the top breeds lack of confidence and hesitancy throughout an organization. Add this to the problems mentioned above and motivation may be irreparably damaged.)

   Virtually all consultants in the personnel field relate a manager's success as a leader and a motivator to his or her sincerity in demonstrating concern for subordinates. "The best way to motivate a subordinate," according to Dr. Feinberg, "is to show him that you are conscious of his needs, his ambitions, his fears and himself as an individual. The insensitive manager, who is perhaps unintentionally aloof, cold, impersonal and uninterested in his staff, usually finds it very difficult to get his people to put out an extra effort."¹² Dr. Feinberg's seventeen ways for a manager to show his concern and sensitivity for (hence to motivate) employees follow:

1. Communicate standards, and be consistent. (Minimizes misdirected effort and motivates through known goals).

2. Be aware of your own biases and prejudices. (Emotional reactions often color what should be objective judgment.)

3. Let people know where they stand. (Do this consistently through performance review or other methods. To withhold this critical information does the ultimate

Page 154

disservice to your organization — through demotivating the employee — and to the employee, who needs and has a right to know.)

4. Give praise when it is appropriate. (Properly handled, this is one of the most powerful motivators — especially in difficult performance areas or areas of anxiety.)

5. Keep your employees informed of changes that may affect them. (This doesn't mean telling them all company secrets, but you evidence your concern for them by informing them of matters in which they are likely to have a direct interest.)

6. Care about your employees. (Not only be attuned to the individual needs of those under you, but communicate this awareness.)

7. Perceive people as ends, not means. (To avoid the charge of using people for your own selfish goals, remember Thomas Cook, the explorer. He named a newly discovered island after the first one to spot it. He regarded each man on the crew as a partner in the adventure and they loved him for the feeling of usefulness he gave them as individuals.)

8. Go out of your way to help subordinates. (A little extra effort, some personal inconvenience, goes a long way with subordinates in confirming the feeling that what they are doing is important to you... and that they are, too. Be sure the help you are giving is what is needed. Remember that in correcting an error, improving a deficiency, or strengthening a weakness, you must first know the individual. This may take hours of hard thought and experience.)

9. Take responsibility for your employees. (A part of caring is the willingness to assume some responsibility

Page 155

for what happens to your employees. Be involved in their personal failures as well as their successes. A part of you fails or succeeds with them. As Frank Stanton, former CBS network president, asked his key people, "Is this the best job you and I can do together?" He thus demonstrated that he assumed partial responsibility and that he really cared.)

10. Build independence. (A supervisor who cares seeks to loosen and gradually drop the reins of supervision. Encourage independent thinking, initiative, resourcefulness.)

11. Exhibit personal diligence. (The most highly motivated leaders have the most highly motivated followers. Example is one of the best motivating factors.)

12. Be tactful with your employees. (Consideration, courtesy, sense of balance, appreciation and sensitivity to the views of others — all are important in dealing with employees.)

13. Be willing to learn from others. (Give new ideas a friendly reception, even when you know they will not work. This will encourage more creative thinking, and future ideas that may work.)

14. Demonstrate confidence. (Review any doubts you may have about your department, your staff, your projects or your company alone and in private. Demonstration of the leader's confidence builds confidence in those following. Show by your behavior and speech that you are confident that the work can be done; confident of your own responsibility; confident of their ability to handle the job.)

15. Allow freedom of expression. (Assuming your subordinates are reasonably competent, relax your vigil

Page 156

and allow them freedom to do things their way occasionally. Be more concerned with ultimate results than with methods of accomplishing them. This makes assignments much more interesting and challenging for subordinates.)

16. Delegate, delegate, delegate. (Assuming your people are competent and ambitious, delegate to them as much of your burden as you can. Recognize that pressure motivates and that most of us are not challenged to perform close to our capacity. Then, as much as possible, let them ride with their own decisions, learn from their own mistakes, and revel in their own successes.)

17. Encourage ingenuity. (The lowest-paid clerk may be ingenious. Challenge creativity by urging subordinates to beat your system of doing things. If your filing system isn't satisfactory, don't change it yourself; have your clerks and office manager take the job. The challenge to improve on the boss's system may bring surprising results.)

   Perhaps one of the least recognized but most important principles in motivation is that of "participation in decision-making." In viewing the hierarchy of needs one can readily appreciate that once an employee or a group of employees have adequate income to satisfy their physiological and security needs, participation in the decisions affecting their work may provide an effective means of satisfying all three of the ascending needs in the hierarchy — social needs, ego needs and self-realization.

   One of the significant steps in researching this area occurred in 1954 when the Foundation for Research on Human Behavior invited a number of business concerns, research agencies and other organizations to participate in

Page 157

a series of seminars on the subject of  "Leadership Patterns and Organizational Effectiveness."¹³ The basic principles of participation, as stated by Allen, holds that "motivation to accomplish results tends to increase as people are given opportunity to participate in the decisions affecting those results."¹⁴ This participation requires systematic provision for consultation with subordinates in those matters directly related to their jobs. The psychological result of asking subordinates for suggestions, recommendations and advice is the development of a "mutuality of interest" with a powerful motivational impact.

SELECTING PEOPLE

   The importance of skill in selection of people has doubtless been overlooked in Christian organizations as it has in industry. More attention has often been paid to the purchase of a new machine for the shop than to the selection of a new executive representing an investment — over the career of the employee — of perhaps ten to one hundred times as much.

   Still no one denies that of all the assets available for furthering the organization's objectives, none is more precious that its people. Without them the rest would be for naught. As a steel magnate commented, "you may take my industries, my properties, my money — but leave me my people and I'll gain them back and more."

   The high cost of making mistakes in selection of personnel is reflected in what has been a management goal of the General Motors Corporation:

The careful selection and placement of employees to make sure that they are physically, mentally and temperamentally fitted to the jobs they are expected to do; to make sure that new employees can reasonably be expected to develop into desirable

Page 158

employees, and so that there will be a minimum number of square pegs in round holes.¹⁵

   Milton Mandell, in his authoritative work entitled The Selection Process: Choosing the Right Man for the Job, cited this particular management goal as notable for a number of reasons: its reiteration of top management's belief in the importance of the selection process; its inclusion of physical, mental and temperamental attributes as job qualifications; its recognition of the concomitant roles of supervision and training in developing "desirable employees"; and its understanding that selection is never perfect — there will always be "a minimum number of square pegs in round holes." An employee may fail for an infinite variety of reasons, and no selection program can evaluate or anticipate all of them.¹⁶

   With the large number of new employees every month in the United States, it is not surprising that the high cost of mistakes in selection has been evaluated with increasing concern. Generally overlooked by Christian organizations is the distinction between selection and placement as well as the comparable difficulty of the latter process.

   Whereas in selection the applicant must be measured both against general job requirements and against other applicants, in placement the applicant has to be measured against the different requirements of several positions. Questions arising with respect to placement criteria include the relative importance of skills, promotion opportunities, interests, kind of supervisor, and type of colleagues the applicant will find most congenial. One helpful analysis suggests that the ambitious employee will be influenced more strongly by career opportunities,whereas workers with low levels of aspiration will tend to value placement based on interests and on quality of supervision.

Page 159

Colleagues will be least important to the lone wolf and most important to the gregarious type of employee.¹⁷

   While the failure to determine the qualifications desired in a given position is common, no less an error is the setting of standards too high for the job. Such a mistake can lead to an unnecessary reduction in the number of applicants, increased recruiting costs, delays in filling a key position, and ultimately excessive turnover when those selected find the work beneath their capabilities.

   Virtually all writers in the field agree on the vital importance of selecting applicants with the greatest potential for growth in the organization's particular environment and their placement where that potential will be developed to its fullest. As Mandell concludes, "Clearly, no organization can itself survive and grow if it fails to hire employees with the capacity for self-development and to provide an atmosphere conducive to achievement."¹⁸

   While detailed analysis of the factors entering into sound selection and placement procedures is beyond the purview of this book — for this Mandell's comprehensive work is highly recommended — the factor of identification of potential requires comment. A common error is to assume that effective performance at one level within an organization necessarily is predictive of probable success at a higher level. While much support may be marshalled for the conclusion that the most dependable criterion for predicting success is past performance — "You ask me to predict what a man will do... tell me what he has done" — the dangers of overemphasis in this approach are being questioned with increasing regularity.

   Dr. Robert McMurry, in material for the McMurry Company management seminars, observes that while rank-and-file employees are a good source of middle-management material, this group is a poor place to look for

Page 160

top-management candidates. He cautions that only rarely is it possible to move a person up more than two or three levels successfully because the qualities that tend to make successful top managers, such a breadth of perspective, genuine self-confidence and self-reliance, as well as compulsive drive, are not those which will be welcomed at middle-management levels.¹⁹ Dr. George Smith, formerly of Harvard University's Graduate School of Business Administration, summarized the conclusions of a nation-wide survey on this subject:

Men seemed to lose their effectiveness on moving from one level to another, or on moving from jobs that were predominantly line, and vice versa. For example, it is sometimes difficult to move from local functional officer to headquarters functional officer; from division general manager to headquarters staff officer; from headquarters staff officer to division manager; from headquarters staff officer to chief executive.

Changes such as these involve a difficult emotional adjustment because they involve new status relationships with others. Some men apparently find it easier to master a new function than to acquire a new status. For example, a treasurer of a fairly large chemical company became its sales manager with great success. On the other hand, a successful regional production manager in a metal products company had great difficulty when he was made headquarters manager of production.²⁰

Psychiatrists Mabel Blake Cohen and Robert A. Cohen, commenting on these same differences, concluded:

Success in administration on higher levels has one significant difference from that on lower ones — namely, that there is no superior to please, or to manipulate when one reaches the policy-making top. Therefore, for the top man, the motivations and skills must be at least in some ways different from those of the men who work under him. He must, for one thing, have a considerably greater degree of maturity and independence of judgment. There is a large, and open, question as to whether

Page 161

these traits will be found at the top in the event that they are lacking on the way up the ladder. Further ... there is considerable doubt whether the personality characteristics contributing to success in climbing up the ladder are always conducive to good leadership once a man has arrived at the top. ²¹

   In his treatment of executive selection, Mandell cautions that "there are no unqualifiedly great executives, as a look at the executive qualification checklist following will convince us. The most capable is the one who is at the right place at the right time and who is judged by those who admire his strengths and are not affected by, nor ignorant of, his weaknesses. As many of the 'mistakes' made in executive selection result from errors in the attributes being sought as from errors in evaluation."

Executive Qualification Checklist

A. Effectiveness with people.

1. Represents the organization effectively.

2. Gains the confidence of superiors.

3. Handles human relations problems so that morale and productivity are improved.

4. Assigns employees to jobs in which they can perform best.

5. Is willing to accept subordinates who are not "yes men and women."

6. Gets the full co-operation of other units.

.7. Deals effectively even with people who are in opposition.

8. Gets people to want to do their best.

B. Decision-making ability.

1. Anticipates how people will react to decisions and proposals.

Page 162

2. Absorbs new data and concepts quickly.

3. Recognizes the need to get the facts before making a decision.

4. Makes decision on the organization of the unit which promote co-ordination and efficiency.

5. Is willing to change his or her program and methods in order to keep up with current needs and development.

6. Makes decisions on technical problems which keep in mind the latest developments.

7. Takes a broad approach to problems.

8. Spots the key parts of complex problems and does not get lost in minor details.

9. Thinks of new approaches to problems.

10. Is willing to accept necessary risks.

C. General executive ability.

1. Delegates appropriately.

2. Knows how to check on results.

3. Sets priorities effectively.

4. Uses manpower effectively.

5. Corrects situations when they need improvement and does not wait for an emergency.

6. Plans carefully.

7. Handles the administrative details of day-by-day operations competently.

8. Is successful in presenting budget requests for the unit.

9. Selects highly capable subordinates.

10. Relates departmental work to the work of the whole organization.

11. Takes into account the public relations implications of his or her actions.

Page 163

12. Handles many different problems effectively at the same time.

13. Works efficiently under frustrating conditions.

14. Balances interests in details and in broad problems.

D. Personal characteristics.

1. Considers divergent and new points of view.

2. Is flexible in approach to problems.

3. Is reliable in what he or she says.

4. Is willing to accept responsibility.

5. Adjusts easily to new situations, problems and methods.

6. Remains calm in an emergency.

7. Works to fix things that go wrong instead of making excuses.

8. Gives an honest report on a problem even if it hurts personally.

E. Stamina and good health.

F. Organizational and technical knowledge required for decisions, control and representation.

G. Obviously, for those of us in the Lord's work, a primary qualification is the person's individual, consistent relationship with Jesus Christ.

   Many suggested steps in the selection process are available. Most well-managed organizations subscribe to certain basic steps.

1. The Job. Make sure the job is necessary. If it cannot be reassigned, then streamline it before looking for a person to fill the position. Summarize the functions, responsibilities and organizational relationships in a position description. Certain characteristics will be essential for the person filling this position. Summarize

Page 164

them in a position qualifications list. Included will be such personal specifications as age, sex, family and related matters; educational requirements; and previous experience.

2. The Search. Determine whether candidates will be sought outside as well as inside the organization. For considerations such as morale and past experience, promotion from within is generally recommended. Lack of qualified material or an advanced stage of internal conflict may dictate extending the search outside the organization.

   Christian organizations frequently face difficulty in locating candidates for key positions, Unlike their counterparts in industry, they are restricted by strong restraints which discourage their hiring from other similar organizations. Generally the compensation is not comparable to similar positions in industry so that the motivation for one coming in from the business world must be direct service in the Lord's work and the satisfactions resulting therefrom. Few Christian organizations seem able to tap their total potential resources with respect to the search for managerial talent. Board members, staff, key donors and friends are all potential and logical sources for suggestions. Better means should be sought for making known the various organizational needs.

3. Review Applications. Applications should be screened in a systematic manner to determine those which meet the qualifications and requirements for the position. At this point the benefit of clear and concise statements of job requirements and qualifications becomes apparent. The better the job done with these, the easier the task of winnowing out applicants not qualified. Screening at this point saves

Page 165

expenditure of time and effort in testing and interviewing unsuitable candidates.

4. Administer Tests. Various tests properly used by trained specialists have been established as an invaluable tool for the selection process. Professional skills are required for interpretation of test results, and in successful programs test results are used as indicators and aids in the selection process, not as the final determinant. Among the industries that have used extensive test programs are General Motors and Sears, Roebuck and Company. The latter finds the tests are useful in identifying characteristics in a manager before hiring which could otherwise be learned online through years of observation. Sears looks for the following characteristics in its managers:

Mental Ability: Of prime importance here is the speed with which a person can learn; a good manager learns quickly.

Administrative Skill: A manager should be able to make objective decisions without becoming emotionally involved. The manager should be co-operative, tolerant and open-minded about other people and should be able to show firmness in dealing with others.

Sociability: A manager should want to work with other people and to help them. He or she should meet people easily and take the initiative in group activities.

Stability and Predictability: A key characteristics of a manager is a cheerful and optimistic outlook. The manager should feel personally confident.

Page 166

Ambition: To be an effective manager, a person should want to reach the heights.

5. Conduct Preliminary Interviews: After obviously inadmissible candidates have been screened out, it is possible to interview the narrowed field. The manager, personnel department or an assistant may conduct these interviews. Questions designed to obtain the most helpful information at this point include:

   a. Why are you interested in this job? Is there a real interest in the position? Does the candidate know enough about the position to match his or her own capabilities against what the job requires? Or is the person merely looking for a job? Help the candidate make up his or her mind on this question before continuing.

   b. Which, of all the jobs you have held, did you like best? Why? Here the interviewer can get a good indication of the person's real interests. It is important that the candidate really be interested in the job.

   c. Where do you expect to be at the end of your first year with us? Your fifth? This should give the interviewer an idea of what the applicant thinks of his or her abilities, as well as indicate the person's level of energy, drive and ambition.

   d. What are your strongest characteristics? Your weakest? The applicant's own estimate may be surprisingly informative. The interviewer can follow up on leads with further questioning.

   e. Would you go back to your last job if offered the opportunity? Why or why not? Answers to this question should be appraised carefully. They should

Page 167

bring out information that will tell a great deal about the person being interviewed.

6. Investigate Previous History. Before finalizing the selection, the manager should look into the previous history of the applicant. What was the previous employer's estimation of the candidate? Why did the candidate leave that job? Was the candidate ambitious and hard-working? Have trouble with the boss? Answers to these questions, generally most easily asked over the phone, will be most helpful. When these replies are compared with two or three similar responses from other former employers, a pattern can usually be put together which will form a forecast of anticipated behavior.

7. Conduct Final Interview. This should be a detailed interview conducted by the manager to provide final assurance that this is the right person. This will also give the candidate a final opportunity to size up the manager. Frequently multiple interviews are arranged to provide maximum possible exposure to each other and to the job requirements.

8. Provide Physical Examination. Health is important to the manager facing the responsibilities and pressures in today's managerial positions. Not infrequently such exams reveal conditions which were unknown to the applicant and they may also provide information which is helpful for the employer either for the final decision of selection or of maximum utilization of talent and capability following the selection.

9. Maintain Follow-up on the Job. While this point will be developed more extensively a bit later, it is stressed here for emphasis and because it ought to be thought of as the final part of the selection process. Too often new hands are treated as old: orientation

Page 168

periods are treated as testing periods; training is overlooked in the search for results. Alert the team to the new member's arrival beforehand so that they can make him or her feel accepted, too. See that the new employee is properly introduced and assigned someone to be available at all times to answer questions of any nature, if you cannot do so yourself. This will smooth the adjustment period considerably and solve minor problems before they can become serious. Train by continuous counseling and careful appraisal of performance. "The first few weeks are critical," cautions Allen. "If we can help the new man adjust successfully to his new job and teammates, we will have then accomplished a major responsibility as a professional manager."

   While specific organizational requirements make it impossible to prescribe any fixed pattern or procedure for universal application, the Johns-Manville selection procedure has been cited by Mandell for a number of reasons including:

   Use of basic selection methods: interviews, application form, tests, reference checks, medical examination.

   Delineation of major areas of job qualifications and their relation to each selection method.

   Differentiation between rejection (if applicant possesses less than desired minimum of a characteristics) and selection (if applicant has the minimum or better).

   Use of each selection method as a rejection factor to reduce expense and to insure that each applicant finally considered qualifies in terms of the characteristics measured by each method.

Page 169

(There's a TABLE here)

Summary of Johns-Manville

Selection Procedure

To warrant employment an applicant must meet the standards at each step of the selection procedure, and must qualify for the job in all five respects.

The qualifications to look for at each step are shaded: See if applicant appears to have qualifications. Look for evidence he or she has the qualifications.

STEPS IN SELECTION

Reject if: Lacks essential qualifications.

Reject if: Test scores are too low, or too high.

Reject if:  Record in prior job disqualifies — poor job progress, or couldn't get along with people.

Reject if:  Too little ability, personally unacceptable, poor work habits, no real interest, immature or unstable.

Reject if: Picture as a whole is not favorable.

Screening Interview

Application Form

Employment Tests

Reference Check

Comprehensive Interview

ANALYSIS & DECISION

Qualifies in all respects.

Employ on favorable medical report.

Page 170

   Arrangement of the steps in the selection procedure according to expense, with the least expensive methods used first.

   Collection of reference and test information before the comprehensive interview.²²

   We spoke earlier of the high cost of mistakes in careless selection and placement procedures. The loss of managerial time is, of course, part and parcel of the same waste. When Jack Taylor observed that "the deepest pitfall any organization can dig for itself is to put small men in big jobs," one of the things he must have had in mind was the colossal waste of executive time inevitably involved.

DEVELOPING PEOPLE

   Personnel development has been described as "helping people improve their knowledge, attitudes and skills."²³ Managers somehow overlook the vital role this function plays in effective leadership. Even if key positions were filled with people who brought to them all the knowledge, attitudes and skills required, the normal growth of the organization and the consequent job enlargement would make it imperative that serious attention be given these attributes. The rate of development of concepts and techniques in the field of personnel alone adds a still more critical dimension to the picture.

   Strange, then, that so little attention is being paid to an area so important to the future of our Christian organizations. Many executives in religious organizations realize in a vague way that there are needs, but haven't taken time to identify them specifically. Others frankly state that their organizations have "no training programs worthy of the name."

   A strange paradox confronts us at once. Jack Taylor identifies it by observing that the manager's degree of

Page 171

confidence in those selected as key people will inevitably affect the manager's approach to development. It is often the case that the more casual the selection procedure, the greater the confidence in the selection, and the more ready for leadership responsibility selectees are considered to be. Conversely, the more careful the selection process, the less confidence he or she has in the selection, and the less ready for leadership responsibilities the selectees are believed to be.²⁴ This paradoxical attitude would seem to mark the poor start for the certainty of a worse ending.

   To aid in the search for requisite, relevant, realistic, feasible leadership-development programs, Taylor suggests a simple basic formula:

That which leadership requires, minus

The requirements which the selectees already need, leaves

The selectees' total development needs.

Out of this remainder, then...

That which the selectees can develop, minus

That which they cannot develop, leaves

The selectees' practical development needs.

Out of these needs, then...

That which is common to all selectees comprises

The group's development-program content;

That which is common to one selectee comprises

The individual's development-program content.

The subjects revealed by application of this formula will constitute the leadership-development program. Broken down into classifications pertaining to knowledge, skills or attitudes, they represent what you will be endeavoring to develop and will determine how you will proceed. Definitions of these three essentials of leadership development are:

Page 172

Knowledge: cognizance of facts, truths and other information.

Attitudes: reactions to things, people, situations and information.

Skills: the ability to put knowledge into practice.²⁵

   Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent in industry each year on management development, seminars, evening courses, job-rotation, and in-company training programs. The end results of this massive investment have come under increasing scrutiny. In terms of improved knowledge, attitudes, and skills of managers, questions are being raised as to the net worth of the programs. The concern for answers in this area is increased by dire predictions that soon there will be a critical shortage of management talent.

   Reasons being advanced for this phenomenon include blind reliance on formalized programs not attuned to real needs of the managers or to the ultimate objectives of the organizations. Another failure is seen in the tendency to produce functional specialists rather than generalists with a broad overview of management. Years of experience in confining or highly structured jobs may diminish the supervisor's capability of responding to the unstructured and unpredictable demands of the managerial position.

   Training away from the job can provide essential perspective, new insight and additional knowledge. It cannot, however, provide a substitute for direct application of managerial knowledge and skills to the responsibilities on the job.

   Finally, there is undue emphasis on promotion, rather than development, as the chief end of such programs. The motivation which should be sought in this situation is the desire to excel in the managerial performances in which we are engaged.

Page 173

   A fatal defect in many development programs is the lack of full support from top management. Without realizing that their own actions have doomed the ultimate success of the program, many executives have encouraged their key people to participate while showing in one way or another that they would never do so themselves. "Too busy," comes the quick answer. But when top management is "too busy to bother," it doesn't take middle management long to get the idea that it probably isn't important enough for them to bother, either. The discerning  executive who recognizes the full impact of personal example as well as the importance of keeping current with new developments in the field of management, does not hesitate to take the first step in this vitally important area.

   If, as Allen cautions, the human material with which the manager works is at once the weakest and the strongest of the resources available to him, it is small wonder that the most successful executives place personnel development among their highest priorities.

Chapter Twelve  ||  Table of Contents

REFERENCES:

1. Taylor, Jack W., How to Select and Develop Leaders, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1962.

2. Allen, Louis A., The Management Profession, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964.

3. Kepner, Charles, and Benjamin Tregoe, The Rational Manager, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965.

4. Shapp, Harold, "Trained Men," Vol. 44, No. 3, Executive's Digest, March, 1965.

5. Allen, The Management Profession.

6. Ibid.

7. Larson, Bruce, Dare to Live Now!, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, 1965.

8. Newcomb, Robert, and Marg Sammons, "Communications Clinic," Personnel, March-April, 1966.

Page 174

9. Dubin, Robert, Human Relations in Administration, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1961.

10. Buchanan, Paul C, "The Leader Looks at Individual Motivation," Looking into Leadership Executive Library, Leadership, Resources, Inc., Washington, D.C.

11. Feinberg, M. M., Effective Psychology for Managers, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, 1966.

12. Ibid.

13. "Leadership Patterns and Organizational Effectiveness," Foundation for Research on Human Behavior, Ann Arbor, 1954.

14. Allen, The Management Profession.

15. Hendrix, A. A., "Interviewing Techniques," Industrial Medicine and Surgery, Vol. 19, 1950.

16. Mandell, Milton M., The Selection Process: Choosing the Right Man for the Job, American Management Association,New York, 1964.

17. Kuhlen, Raymond G. "Needs, Perceived Need Satisfaction Opportunities, and Satisfaction with Occupation," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 47, 1963.

18. Mandel, Milton M., A Company Guide to the Selection of Salesmen, Research Report 24, American Management Association, New York, 1955.

19. McMurry, Robert N., Identifying and Developing Potential Top Executives, The McMurry Company, Chicago.

20. Smith, George A, Managing Geographically Decentralized Companies, Graduate School of Business Administration, Division of Research, Harvard University, Boston, 1958.

21. Cohen, Mabel Blake, and Robert A. Cohen, "Personality as a Factor in Administrative Decisions," Psychiatry, Vol. 14, 1951.

22. Mandell, A Company Guide to the Selection of Salesmen.

23. Allen, The Management Profession.

24. Taylor, How to Select and Develop Leaders.

25. Allen, The Management Profession.

Chapter Twelve  ||  Table of Contents