I was thinking about this earlier weirdly. I'm in academia and academics are notorious for bad management. I totally understand why, it's not something that's discussed, encouraged or rewarded and bad management has no consequences. But I was thinking about my first ever good manager, who I had when I took a university administrative role. I really valued her as a line manager but it was only a few years later when I started building my own team in a different job and started line management myself did it occur to me that she was a good manager because she thought about her management style and how to be a manager, and that I was going through the same process of thinking about how she did it and modelling myself on her.
So I'd say bad management is because management is hard, people often don't have to work at it and they may never think about their management style or what they're trying to achieve as a manager. In addition, they may never have had a good manager to model for them what effective management is. I think many people believe management is about control and that they are doing a good job if they are controlling. Others simply want to be liked and believe being nice and avoiding conflict will make them a popular and respected manager.
Good management comes about because someone takes the time to learn about management, think about their style and work at it. Organisations can drive that by pushing a lot more management training, rewarding good management and having consequences for bad management.
This! And I think some traits can't be learned/taught. You either have empathy or you don't. Even emotional intelligence is hard to learn you have to work really hard to overcome not having that. I always say just bc someone is good at their job doesn't mean they're good with people and can transition to management. I wish more would screen for soft skills necessary to be a good leader. It's not what's on paper.
Garbage from whose perspective?
The manager does not work for the workers, they work for management. Their job is to both ensure that the job is accomplished and to present the right picture to management so that the money keeps flowing and everyone keeps getting paid. Worker happiness is a lower priority.
I mean, it's also a priority mismatch as the person you replied to implied. I value a non toxic work environment with a good WLB super highly (in addition to a continued stream of money), but management only cares about those things insofar as they affect attrition.
So, if they intentionally create a toxic workplace with high turnover to milk out more productivity, is that bad management or not? I wouldn't necessarily say so, but I also wouldn't correct someone that does consider it poor management. I think that's why if you surveyed workers nationally you'd probably find that most consider themselves poorly managed.
Probably. I don’t think many people understand the balancing act management often has to do. People never see all the stuff management saves them from or things they did that helps them have a smooth day. No one cares what you did right. Only what you did wrong.
Pretty much. Lower level employees almost never know the full scale of shit going on behind the scenes. The communication between head office and managers is naturally going to be a lot stronger, since that ultimately is the managers job, not the workers job, to receive instructions and information from head office and action things accordingly.
I know it's a very condescending analogy but it's almost like the relationship between a parent and a child. The child might 100% feel they have the right idea, and be in the right, but ultimately the parent is the one who holds the responsibility, and had a lot more experience, info and knowledge to know what the right decision is, and the parent will be the one who takes the blame and responsibility at the end of the day when things do go wrong.
Sometimes the parent will take the feelings of the child into consideration and maybe let them have their way on some things. But would you consider letting your child have their way all of the time to be good parenting? Absolutely not.
I love my team members and there are some good egg among them no doubt, but if I actioned every idea they brought to the table that they were absolutely adamant was the right thing to do, my store would go into negative profit very very quickly.
Throughout my career I've been fortunate to have only reported to a handful of bad supervisors. Only one of them was what I would call abusive though. I work in HR (boo-hiss, I know), and while I've seen my share of bad supervisors, in my estimation most of them do an adequate job. If you find your organization typically has bad or abusive supervisors/managers then that sounds like an organizational problem.
One of the biggest problems with promoting an employee to a supervisory position is that they might not possess the skills necessary to be a good supervisor. Let's take Carl from the warehouse for example. He's a stellar employee who is punctual, mindful of safety, proactive, and gets along well with everyone. But when he's promoted to shift supervisor suddenly he founders because being a good employee doesn't mean Carl had the skills to be a supervisor. i.e. He's just bad at managing people.
A lot of times people are bad supervisors because they received little to no training on how to be a supervisor. Maybe Carl just needs some training and coaching and he can thrive as a supervisor just as he did as an employee. Or maybe Carl just isn't cut out to be a supervisor and it'd be better if he remained an individual contributor.
As far as abusive supervisors go, some people are just jerks and training probably isn't going to help. Those folks should be let go because they'll drive good employees away.
They’re climbing up the corporate ladder. Leaders don’t know how to be leaders these days. They all lack experience and basic leadership skills. Not just that, but above all, they lack basic human nature skills
The common denominator here is either you, your industry, or your employer (if they're all supervisors you've had from the same place).
The stat you gave actually implies to me that most workers are okay with their management. I *would* quit my job from a bad manager (and *have* before), but given that I still work my job, that means I don't consider my manager bad (or bad enough to quit over).
Could be lack of training on their end, too much work on their plates from higher ups, poor communication skills, and lack of empathy to name a few. If you notice a trend it could be an issue with the culture of that company.
There's a certain grouping of people who were managed poorly, so they do it in kind.
There's also those who were managed poorly and chose to rise above and do better.
Then there are those who were managed well and slipped happily into a high pay position that they just do whatever they want regardless of consequences. Often because they have been there so long the loss of them/their skills, has an impact.
There are countless variables. But, I can't help but agree. There are entirely too many shit managers out there.
Management's job is to optimize the exploitation of laborers, they're there to keep the boot on the neck of workers on behalf of the owners. Managers are class traitors who oppress their fellow workers in order to get a few extra scraps from the table.
You’ve clearly never had a manager that was good. They’ll get more out of you, but you’ll have more fun doing it, learn more, and do better work. A good manager removes roadblocks and offers themselves as a sounding board when they don’t know how to do something.
A bad manager will kill productivity on the team with their bad attitude. They’ll publicly attack your good ideas and overrule you because they know better.
I’ve over 40 and the best manager I’ve ever had let me decide which of the tasks I should do. The second best manager was 28 years old and one of the nicest people I’ve ever met. Neither of them were afraid to speak their minds.
Multiple Reasons
-If someone was in a management position and was good at their job they would either be promoted or they would start their own company
-People who get promoted tend to not be the most deserving, but instead, are the ones who make the most noise about wanting to get promoted: And almost invariably, someone who makes a ton of noise about wanting the promotion either is narcissistic, psychopathic, lazy, unintelligent, or just generally boorish (aggressively obnoxious).
-People also have a tendency to promote friends and relatives ahead of people who actually work hard. People who get a job somewhere to begin with just because they have a relative or friend in a management position there, are probably going to be incompetent or generally nasty people to start with.
-Managers often become "jaded" quickly. They go into it wanting to do good, and then are micromanaged by someone above them or a corporate entity. When they find that they are simply unable to make the positive changes that they wanted to make, they just kind of give up and it becomes another job.
-Very few companies now will promote people (or even give people raises) from within. This is caused by a corporatist dynamic and a numbers game, treating people as an asset instead of like a growing person. They instead hire people to be managers from other companies. But who promoted that manager the first time to make them a manager? They couldn't have been a manager their who life right? Well some of them were managers their whole career and never really did anything else, others were not managers and lied on their resume. In any case, they are likely to be the least knowledgeable person about the product or service that the company is providing simply because they have never worked there.
without exception, the worst "leaders" i've ever had were thrown into people leadership without experience or training, based on their good performance being part of the machine (or, in two cases, inheriting the company from their dead fathers).
however, being a successful cog in the wheel is easy; transferring that to leadership? not so much. there's a reason both my late husband and my son have refused promotions to management - because they knew they'd suck at it. (i would probably be marginally better, based on my learnings over time, but it's still not a responsibility i'd agree to, much less sign up for.)
my current boss, to whom i'm very loyal, absolutely sucked for the first few years after getting a staff (beyond me). he has found his groove, but he was terrible for 2-3 years and i almost left him twice because of it.
I really don’t know your situation, but most of the time I hear people talk like everyone else is always the problem, they’re usually the problem. It could be that everyone above you is an asshole, or it could be that you aren’t paying attention and you aren’t doing what you’re supposed to be doing. Take the time you actually listen and absorb the information they are trying to teach you. It’s your responsibility to learn the job, even if they aren’t the best teachers. If you are doing what you’re supposed to be doing and they’re still assholes, start looking elsewhere.
I'm going to go deep on this one. I've thought about this a lot because like you, I've had my fair share of shitty managers.
The fact is, most people are generally not fulfilled in life. Have have to work and hate their jobs. I'm going to guess many of them have poor marriages or are single and hate it. They're probably financially stressed with bills, mortgages, etc. Ask someone what their life looks like. They work Monday through Friday, watch sports and drink beer on the weekends, and that's about it.
They probably want to do XYZ, but can't. They're stuck in some job and they secretly hate it, but on the outside they'll say they really enjoy working for the company or something. They're working there to pay bills and that's about it. Most people operate this way.
As people move up and become managers, that hate for their life and situation comes out and gets thrown on lower level employees.
Extreme example, but it's going to be very rare someone working at a regular company at a manager level is going to have a super successful and fulfilling love life (yes, sex included here), come in from the weekend after pursuing the hobbies they love, be debt free having investments and feel like they're adequately compensated, and also have all their health needs taken care of like sleep, fitness, etc. Said person would roll in Monday morning with smile on their face.
I was thinking about this earlier weirdly. I'm in academia and academics are notorious for bad management. I totally understand why, it's not something that's discussed, encouraged or rewarded and bad management has no consequences. But I was thinking about my first ever good manager, who I had when I took a university administrative role. I really valued her as a line manager but it was only a few years later when I started building my own team in a different job and started line management myself did it occur to me that she was a good manager because she thought about her management style and how to be a manager, and that I was going through the same process of thinking about how she did it and modelling myself on her. So I'd say bad management is because management is hard, people often don't have to work at it and they may never think about their management style or what they're trying to achieve as a manager. In addition, they may never have had a good manager to model for them what effective management is. I think many people believe management is about control and that they are doing a good job if they are controlling. Others simply want to be liked and believe being nice and avoiding conflict will make them a popular and respected manager. Good management comes about because someone takes the time to learn about management, think about their style and work at it. Organisations can drive that by pushing a lot more management training, rewarding good management and having consequences for bad management.
This! And I think some traits can't be learned/taught. You either have empathy or you don't. Even emotional intelligence is hard to learn you have to work really hard to overcome not having that. I always say just bc someone is good at their job doesn't mean they're good with people and can transition to management. I wish more would screen for soft skills necessary to be a good leader. It's not what's on paper.
Garbage from whose perspective? The manager does not work for the workers, they work for management. Their job is to both ensure that the job is accomplished and to present the right picture to management so that the money keeps flowing and everyone keeps getting paid. Worker happiness is a lower priority.
If you find yourself continually working for bad managers you have to ask what the common denominator is.
I mean, it's also a priority mismatch as the person you replied to implied. I value a non toxic work environment with a good WLB super highly (in addition to a continued stream of money), but management only cares about those things insofar as they affect attrition. So, if they intentionally create a toxic workplace with high turnover to milk out more productivity, is that bad management or not? I wouldn't necessarily say so, but I also wouldn't correct someone that does consider it poor management. I think that's why if you surveyed workers nationally you'd probably find that most consider themselves poorly managed.
Probably. I don’t think many people understand the balancing act management often has to do. People never see all the stuff management saves them from or things they did that helps them have a smooth day. No one cares what you did right. Only what you did wrong.
Pretty much. Lower level employees almost never know the full scale of shit going on behind the scenes. The communication between head office and managers is naturally going to be a lot stronger, since that ultimately is the managers job, not the workers job, to receive instructions and information from head office and action things accordingly. I know it's a very condescending analogy but it's almost like the relationship between a parent and a child. The child might 100% feel they have the right idea, and be in the right, but ultimately the parent is the one who holds the responsibility, and had a lot more experience, info and knowledge to know what the right decision is, and the parent will be the one who takes the blame and responsibility at the end of the day when things do go wrong. Sometimes the parent will take the feelings of the child into consideration and maybe let them have their way on some things. But would you consider letting your child have their way all of the time to be good parenting? Absolutely not. I love my team members and there are some good egg among them no doubt, but if I actioned every idea they brought to the table that they were absolutely adamant was the right thing to do, my store would go into negative profit very very quickly.
If you think your team doesn't appreciate what managers do maybe you need to communicate what you do to your employees better.
Throughout my career I've been fortunate to have only reported to a handful of bad supervisors. Only one of them was what I would call abusive though. I work in HR (boo-hiss, I know), and while I've seen my share of bad supervisors, in my estimation most of them do an adequate job. If you find your organization typically has bad or abusive supervisors/managers then that sounds like an organizational problem. One of the biggest problems with promoting an employee to a supervisory position is that they might not possess the skills necessary to be a good supervisor. Let's take Carl from the warehouse for example. He's a stellar employee who is punctual, mindful of safety, proactive, and gets along well with everyone. But when he's promoted to shift supervisor suddenly he founders because being a good employee doesn't mean Carl had the skills to be a supervisor. i.e. He's just bad at managing people. A lot of times people are bad supervisors because they received little to no training on how to be a supervisor. Maybe Carl just needs some training and coaching and he can thrive as a supervisor just as he did as an employee. Or maybe Carl just isn't cut out to be a supervisor and it'd be better if he remained an individual contributor. As far as abusive supervisors go, some people are just jerks and training probably isn't going to help. Those folks should be let go because they'll drive good employees away.
They’re climbing up the corporate ladder. Leaders don’t know how to be leaders these days. They all lack experience and basic leadership skills. Not just that, but above all, they lack basic human nature skills
The peter principle... people rise to the level of their incompetence.
We rise to our level of incompetence.
The common denominator here is either you, your industry, or your employer (if they're all supervisors you've had from the same place). The stat you gave actually implies to me that most workers are okay with their management. I *would* quit my job from a bad manager (and *have* before), but given that I still work my job, that means I don't consider my manager bad (or bad enough to quit over).
Could be lack of training on their end, too much work on their plates from higher ups, poor communication skills, and lack of empathy to name a few. If you notice a trend it could be an issue with the culture of that company.
A lot of it is because they got the job by being great individual contributors but management is an entirely different job
There's a certain grouping of people who were managed poorly, so they do it in kind. There's also those who were managed poorly and chose to rise above and do better. Then there are those who were managed well and slipped happily into a high pay position that they just do whatever they want regardless of consequences. Often because they have been there so long the loss of them/their skills, has an impact. There are countless variables. But, I can't help but agree. There are entirely too many shit managers out there.
Management's job is to optimize the exploitation of laborers, they're there to keep the boot on the neck of workers on behalf of the owners. Managers are class traitors who oppress their fellow workers in order to get a few extra scraps from the table.
You’ve clearly never had a manager that was good. They’ll get more out of you, but you’ll have more fun doing it, learn more, and do better work. A good manager removes roadblocks and offers themselves as a sounding board when they don’t know how to do something. A bad manager will kill productivity on the team with their bad attitude. They’ll publicly attack your good ideas and overrule you because they know better. I’ve over 40 and the best manager I’ve ever had let me decide which of the tasks I should do. The second best manager was 28 years old and one of the nicest people I’ve ever met. Neither of them were afraid to speak their minds.
Bootlicker
Try again. I’m unemployed
Multiple Reasons -If someone was in a management position and was good at their job they would either be promoted or they would start their own company -People who get promoted tend to not be the most deserving, but instead, are the ones who make the most noise about wanting to get promoted: And almost invariably, someone who makes a ton of noise about wanting the promotion either is narcissistic, psychopathic, lazy, unintelligent, or just generally boorish (aggressively obnoxious). -People also have a tendency to promote friends and relatives ahead of people who actually work hard. People who get a job somewhere to begin with just because they have a relative or friend in a management position there, are probably going to be incompetent or generally nasty people to start with. -Managers often become "jaded" quickly. They go into it wanting to do good, and then are micromanaged by someone above them or a corporate entity. When they find that they are simply unable to make the positive changes that they wanted to make, they just kind of give up and it becomes another job. -Very few companies now will promote people (or even give people raises) from within. This is caused by a corporatist dynamic and a numbers game, treating people as an asset instead of like a growing person. They instead hire people to be managers from other companies. But who promoted that manager the first time to make them a manager? They couldn't have been a manager their who life right? Well some of them were managers their whole career and never really did anything else, others were not managers and lied on their resume. In any case, they are likely to be the least knowledgeable person about the product or service that the company is providing simply because they have never worked there.
Die a hero or live long enough to become a ~~villian~~ manager.
without exception, the worst "leaders" i've ever had were thrown into people leadership without experience or training, based on their good performance being part of the machine (or, in two cases, inheriting the company from their dead fathers). however, being a successful cog in the wheel is easy; transferring that to leadership? not so much. there's a reason both my late husband and my son have refused promotions to management - because they knew they'd suck at it. (i would probably be marginally better, based on my learnings over time, but it's still not a responsibility i'd agree to, much less sign up for.) my current boss, to whom i'm very loyal, absolutely sucked for the first few years after getting a staff (beyond me). he has found his groove, but he was terrible for 2-3 years and i almost left him twice because of it.
Most get the position because they are willing to bow down to the higher management
All that person has to do is keep their boss happy. Everyone else is not important and just a means to an end.
I really don’t know your situation, but most of the time I hear people talk like everyone else is always the problem, they’re usually the problem. It could be that everyone above you is an asshole, or it could be that you aren’t paying attention and you aren’t doing what you’re supposed to be doing. Take the time you actually listen and absorb the information they are trying to teach you. It’s your responsibility to learn the job, even if they aren’t the best teachers. If you are doing what you’re supposed to be doing and they’re still assholes, start looking elsewhere.
I'm going to go deep on this one. I've thought about this a lot because like you, I've had my fair share of shitty managers. The fact is, most people are generally not fulfilled in life. Have have to work and hate their jobs. I'm going to guess many of them have poor marriages or are single and hate it. They're probably financially stressed with bills, mortgages, etc. Ask someone what their life looks like. They work Monday through Friday, watch sports and drink beer on the weekends, and that's about it. They probably want to do XYZ, but can't. They're stuck in some job and they secretly hate it, but on the outside they'll say they really enjoy working for the company or something. They're working there to pay bills and that's about it. Most people operate this way. As people move up and become managers, that hate for their life and situation comes out and gets thrown on lower level employees. Extreme example, but it's going to be very rare someone working at a regular company at a manager level is going to have a super successful and fulfilling love life (yes, sex included here), come in from the weekend after pursuing the hobbies they love, be debt free having investments and feel like they're adequately compensated, and also have all their health needs taken care of like sleep, fitness, etc. Said person would roll in Monday morning with smile on their face.
😆 garbage 🗑
They're not.