Daryl's Story


The Issue: A Manager’s inability to engage and align himself to the new business direction. The new vision required a management style of responsibility, accountability and consequences.

The Signs: The managers behaviour included:

• Lack of self confidence: to perform the task
• Stress: understanding the need but failing to perform
• Power Issues: due to new management style

The Background: I sought to understand if this person was failing due to external factors (having a new manager) or internal personal factors that resulting in him being a difficult person. Over a period of time, I found he was a difficult person due to the following behavioural characteristics;


• Passive aggressive: as found by others and in his management decisions
• An avoider: failed to engage communicating with his manager
• Procrastinator: postponed decisions or failed to complete tasks
• Complainer:  a victim of past and current decisions
• Idea destroyer: rejecting new directions or visions

Understanding the person: After observations and conversations with him, I identified he likes working mechanically with tools and machine, values practical hands on work and enjoys directing others. He enjoyed the social side of team work inside and outside of work. His common traits were defensive (Argyris), inflexible to change, inability to adapt to future visions, status orientated, practical and genuine with people. He was generous and patient with his staff, very emphatic and cooperative.

Using Holland’s Personality Type Model, I identified he fits the Realistic and Social personality profile. I found his personality types of realistic and social together with his traits; created a barrier between poor performance and expected performance. The Holland model presented a quick personality map to understand his personality. This insight allowed me to development a plan to effectively manage him for success.  

Own Self-reflection: “Success in the knowledge economy comes to those who know themselves, their strengths, their values, and how they best perform.” (Drucker 2005). Often looking within first, allows for the most effective resolution to the problem. Applying this approach, I considered if I effectively communicate my objectives to him, if I poorly interact with him and if my emotions are distorting reality. Drucker suggests feedback analysis encourages self understanding to how you work and allows objectivity with your results. I sought pier opinions on my management style, finding I effectively communicating my directions and engage well with others. Feedback from my colleagues confirmed my conclusion that he was a difficult person.

 

The Outcome: An unfortunate reality is there are people who are not able or not capable of performing to expected standards. No matter what you or the organisation tries to do to get these people to improve they are unwilling or incapable of improvement.


Key Learning for me is: Knowing about other's preferred styles and strengths enables us to provide people with assistance, opportunities, direction and responsibilities that fit well with their needs and motivations. Knowing about our own preferred styles and strengths enables us to decide how and when to adapt, so as to match our behavioural style and communications to best meet the needs of others.




 
Make a Free Website with Yola.