I can't tell you how many times I have heard this statement over the years! I just Googled "Lazy Managers" and came up with four full pages of content. What do we make of this trend?
If it is indeed a trend, then there is something seriously wrong with how the jobs of managers are managed. It is highly unlikely that all of these people get away with being lazy up until the day they are promoted into management.
I presume that most people who claim "Some of my managers are lazy" probably really mean that, "They are not motivated to do what I have asked them to do." If we were to go one step further, it means, "We don't share the same priorities." Another step... "We don't agree on strategy."
If you agree with the latter explanation for those we perceive to be "lazy managers," you can help your organization begin working toward a solution. Specifically, this entails working collectively to establish priorities and develop a strategy that is aligned with your company's goals.
Below is one example of a difference in priority with regard to recruiting. You will see how differing beliefs can quickly spiral into poor business decisions from both ends - managers and those to whom they report.
As most of you know, we at Tidemark have worked very hard at solving some of the problems that plague most recruiting strategies. We strive to provide a consistent, scalable system to attract, follow-up, and recruit high caliber new agents. We've built a non-gimmicky system that simply works. This is an outsourced system - We source the candidates and deliver high numbers consistently.
One of the obstacles we face is the belief among Owners or GM's that having sourcing, appointment setting, and follow-up provided for managers, will make them "lazy." To me, this is like saying that letting your college student use the internet for research, will make them lazy.
You can quickly see that the real problem is not laziness, but a difference in agreed upon priority, and perhaps fuzzy strategy. If managers don't really buy into their priority of recruiting new agents, they won't do it- no matter what.
Those who do view recruiting as a priority and central to their strategy, will use Tidemark's HiringCenter to augment what they're already doing (not replace), thus gaining a competitive advantage. We clearly see differences in recruiting priority in the numbers that are generated by our clients, including differences between offices.
So, it really comes down to agreeing upon priorities, which begins with agreeing on strategy. Tomorrow, I will discuss the advantages of having a clear recruiting strategy...
Comments