management
Perhaps, it is a given that all action will provoke some negative reaction. Not every action is received in totality. No new initiative can be with applause only; it will have its due share of being opposed. There is always somebody within the team who would see ‘dark sides’ to every single move. If such individuals abound in greater number than those heralding positivity, then such organizations are in dire need to shift their paradigm of hiring, retention and succession.
No manager can live perennially against a hostile team. Without being professional ostriches, let us admit that hostile stakeholders are present in every organization. They see only negativity, all around. They preach amongst the team members, not caution, but suspicion. They believe in discord as a means of management balance. They subscribe that there is only evil intent in every action of the competing colleague. They turn violent in conference and board rooms, if they are not listened to. They possess over-active generators to produce negative energy throughout the rank and file. They wish that others should ‘change’ – whilst they remain comfortably cloistered in the realms of misbelief of being ‘righteous managers’.
Corporate mishaps leave behind dejected and most often living-dead workforce. To lose even a single colleague to despair and a negative narrative must remain an unacceptable response, from all levels of the organization. And God-forbid, if an entire unit or team were to be in the dungeons of doom and gloom, then either the organization has to be surgically restored or put to mass burial.
‘Death of one man is a tragedy,’ said Joseph Stalin. I believe he was inspired to say so by taking cue from a Persian saying that my ex-boss used to quote often and it was: death of a single individual is a moving short term tragedy, but the death of millions is a time for celebration. Stalin, as a leader and manager of people, did celebrate through the sordid Serbian camps! (The number of innocent infants and children dying in Syria today is just a matter of statistics for the dead humanity).
In business or government organizations, there should be no room for even a single individual to be put into a cold storage of being a silent mourner. Hence, there also cannot be a mass of negative managers in the entity.
Corporate entities cannot afford a narrative of despair. When people meet, their minds either agree or they collide. In conflict, each wishes to win. The urge to be successful dominates to the extent that it perils larger good. Disagreements are not always wrong. If handled with adequate maturity, these can actually initiate greater positive action.
It is said to be Goethe’s comment: You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him. This attitude demands rising above own heightened sense of self-importance and also to relegate to the background emotions of ego and arrogance. A task that is difficult and tough to follow. Writing donation cheques or approving medical bills of staff does not make a manager known or popular, but behavior and demeanour in dealing with an errant stakeholder, colleague or even a supervisor, is an act that will become newsworthy in the organization. The management team has to be friendly. Those who hold enmity towards fellow colleagues should immediately be shown the door. Such are spoilers of environment, who create their own negative narrative and freely disseminate the same in the entity. As such, they give credence to political principles of divide and rule or even worse, create dissent in the ranks to thrive amidst the chaos that would erupt.
A lot is done on the premise of trust and good attitude, then can ever be achieved through corporate bullying. Regardless of whether budgets are achieved or not, no manager worth his salt will forget that ‘numbers’ are only meant to be temporary and supporting tools for inspiring action. To generate the emotion of inspiration, you have to lay before the team a very solid and strong script of vision.
Money can never buy love or loyalty. In history, whenever it has been used, the recipients have always betrayed the giver – and in the corporate world too, there is never a shortage of a Brutus!
Relate to people by reaching out to them. Step forward to strike a chord – a smile might, or a warm handshake can, spill the negative poisonous potion. Sincerity is the greatest pleader in conflicting views and confrontational position-taking.
Start a positive narrative towards the difficult stakeholders by demonstrating a genuine sense of care and concern. This caring attitude must be embedded in the realm of truth. What does it require?
Time is what they all want – and what is time in management parlance? – it is not mere meetings, with one’s eye on the laptop screen and the fingers on the keypad of the iPhone. Nay, time is only about ‘attention’. Colleagues demand attention. And attention is abstract as money, when it is not delivered earnestly. Impatience is an enemy of attention. As managers where you accord time and energy towards colleagues, you actually replace short term temptations of monetary acknowledgements with long term commitments of devotion towards overcoming challenges of a negative narrative.
Managers who continually demand importance towards themselves do the most harm to corporate culture. I have seen most managers who think that all the bells echo their thoughts. A perilous attitude. Self-love and appreciation are vile and dangerous. Managers should neither love themselves nor give outstanding ratings to either their behavior or decisions.
Frank Leahy, a writer, wrote back in 1955, ‘Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.’ Differences and opposition in opinion/judgment can actually bring more concord than discord. We are sure to be losers when we quarrel with ourselves; it is a civil war, and in all such contentions, triumphs are defeats (Charles Colton). Egotistical responses only inflame the environment. They never converge into a team building act. Clash of opinions must be encouraged for opening up opportunities.
The ability to debate, argue, deliberate and criticize on the corporate platform and to be later smiling in the same company at the luncheon table, with no aversion or ill-will, must be garnered for effective management and the related fall out on corporate culture.
The objective of winning an argument must be matched with corporate goals; the latter cannot be compromised for the former. A divided management team is a sure recipe for disaster. Managers have to be adroit at navigating through turbulence of conflicts within teams. It is best done by controlling elevated levels of ego and passion. The traits of ego and passion have twin capacities of being motivators and de-motivators. It all hinges upon the man at the helm, of how much he is trained to handle conflict management. If he becomes partisan or partial in dealing with it, the likelihood is that the problem will compound to a higher level of emotionally charged disagreement.
I have learnt that it is preferable to being cheated, deceived or misled than to perpetually promote a culture of being eternally suspicious. In handling both resistance and acceptance towards my ideas and vision from the team, I recall to mind the reasons thereof, through the words of Robert Kennedy’s views: ‘If there is nobody in your way, it is because you are not going anywhere.’ Take on the narrative of negative stakeholders and replace it with conviction based on truth.
The writer is a freelance columnist and a banker
