Table 1:Managing-Doing Instrument (Loen, R. O. (1971). Manage More by Doing Less. New York: McGraw-Hill).


Is ThisManagingorDoing? 1. Making a call with one of your people to assist himin solving a technical problem.


2. Signing a cheque to approve a routine expenditure 3. Conducting the initial screening interview of a job applicant.


When this part of the exercise is complete, I usually discuss the results with participants in plenary. Before giving themmy suggested answers, I try to discuss with themthe statements they found difficult to determine. Usually there is a significant level of disagreement within the groups. Following this brief discussion, I issue the suggested answers, a corresponding sample of which can be found in Table 2. I invite themto ‘push back’ againstme if they feel there is a need to justify their own answers. In general, we come to an agreement. However, I take pains to explain to participants that 100%agreement is not as important as the discussion. This includes the realisation that they have now passed into an understanding of this threshold concept and they now have the tools tomonitor their own behaviour in the workplace.


Table 2: Suggested Answers toManaging-Doing Instrument (Loen, R. O. (1971). Manage More by Doing Less. New York: McGraw-Hill)


Suggested answers to instrument: Is ThisManaging or Doing? 1.Doing- The stated purpose of the call is to assist in solving a technical problemrather than to performmanaging elements such as training or supervising.


2.Doing– For two reasons. Signing cheques is a clerical ormechanical function: approving routine expenditures should generally be delegated with a defined procedure and with provision for an occasional compliance audit.


3.Doing– This is a personnel function. Deciding whether to hire someone after the recruiting, screening, and selecting have been done would be staffing, an element ofmanaging.


This approach works. I have used this tool in almost every management programme that I have been associated with throughoutmy career at IMI andmore recently, the School of Business at MU. I have applied it tomanagers in public and private, and in not for profit sectors. I have used when CEOs and senior civil servants were in the room, just asmuch as with newly appointed teamleaders and supervisors. The universal reaction to its use has been very positive withmany participants agreeing that this exercise had opened their eyes to something they could not see previously and that this would be a great asset in their career.


In evaluation exercises used at the end of these sessions I frequently sought to find out what participants found wasmost useful about the session. Here are some of the representative questions and answers fromthose evaluation events:


Question: “What was themost valuable thing you learned at the event?” Answers: “How important it is, delegating work to help develop employees”, “managing equals training”, “managersmust ensure that people do their tasks”, “goodmanagers delegated to develop and trust their people.”


Question: “How will your new knowledge ofmanaging - doing help you to manager better in the workplace?” Answers: “I liked how I learned the importance of developing people”, “I know the kind of work I need to delegate to people”, “it has told me where to developmy team”, “I can control situations better by delegating it to another”.


Results fromthe evaluations are quite consistent with this exercise. A key tip is to introduce themanaging/doing concept in a Socratic way. The participants can get a deeper understanding of whatmanaging is, irrespective of their experience in the world of work. They also grasp ‘the rules of the game’ for being amanager. In addition, it becomes easier for the trainer to put across themore complexmanagement concepts later such as leading, delegating andmotivating. The exercise is very robust and I have yet to see a group or a learner who did not emerge with a good working understanding of the concept and how to apply it.


It is difficult formanagers to learn how tomanage. Few if any books onmanagement live up to their billing. They often fail to tell us what to do in order to be a bettermanager. Management literature often bears little resemblance tomanagement practice. Over 100 years ago Mary Parker Follett defined the essence of themanager’s job. Sadly, in the interim, the literature onmanagement has not transformed her insight into usable tools and techniques. Accordingly,manymanagers become stuck and fail to understand the linkages between so manymanagement concepts. To close the gap, the teaching exercise described heremakes that connection by allowing participants to truly grasp the threshold concept ofmanaging. Following this exercise, participants will be able to distinguish between work that is ‘managing’ and work that is ‘doing’ i.e. non-managing. Crucially, it enables participants to see how this knowledge opens up to a deeper understanding of other key management concepts such as leading,motivating, delegating and organising.


References Loen, R. O. (1971). Manage More by Doing Less. New York: McGraw-Hill.


28


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32