Manager 2.0 - Part III

In this post, I will discuss the next three items(7-9) listed from the Manager 2.0 diagram listed in the Web 2.0 for Business post. Allow me to first express my gratitude to Kathy Sierra for creating the figure, referenced in Web 2.0 for Business post.

Item seven states: "Employees have autonomy, responsibility, and authority." In this statement, the only word I have issue with is autonomy. In all things, there has to be a leader. No one can operate in pure autonomy. Perhaps a better way of putting this is to say that the employee is empowered to work inside a broad framework, to achieve business goals. To do this, they must be responsible, accountable, and have the authority necessary to direct action. However, authority implies an hierarchy of sorts, so there is conflict. If employees rotate jobs frequently, they may encounter a position that has certain authority, which may suit this model.

Item eight states: "Intrinsic motivation to do really good work." Respectfully, that assumes an inwardly motivated individual, which is not typical of the human condition. Most people don't want to go to work, like the old saying, "I work to live, not live to work." If the work one does is interesting, and provides psychic benefits, then motivation will be high. However, external rewards and incentives are very necessary to set both the tone and to enforce expectations.

Item nine states: "Users are king, but not at the expense of employees." I take issue with this point, to a degree. Customers should always be king, but employees should never be treated unfairly. Companies and management need tools to enable the workforce to serve customers and satisfy their needs. Policies, particularly those meant to meet compliance with external forces, need to be crafted in such a way that compliance brings a benefit to the company and not a hindrance to the employee.

Oh, I put the picture in there because its funny. These things can be kind of dry, but I do have a sense of humor, really.

Manager 2.0, Part II

In this second article in a series of five about managing in a Web 2.o framework, I will discuss points 4-6 of the figure found here.

Item four states: "Employees and teams challenge themselves. If one person or team succeeds, everyone wins." Employees should be give great latitude and more importantly, time, in their development. Management needs to insure however, that the development money spent rewards not just the employee, but also the shareholder. A good example would be an employee taking a basket weaving class. That class might really benefit an employee of Martha Stewart, but not necessarily ExxonMobil. Regarding rewarding "everyone" for an effort, hopefully, the work of the team or the individual is geared to the success of the company. In other words, a team win should, by definition, be a corporate win.

Item five states: "Informal job role created by employee, tailored to their strengths and interests, and changes all the time." Outside of the need of formal titles for compensation studies, this makes a lot of sense. As employees mature and become experts in their work, they should be able to move on to new positions, building on those strengths, and learning more about the business. Regular job rotation is widely regarded as a good thing and can be very manageable.

Items six states: "Emphasis on community." A company is a community of sorts, with different teams supporting the company as a whole. Good management practices are about aligning teams to create a well-organized and functioning business. While this corporate/community function is very important, arguably, customers should have the emphasis.

This discussion has left me with an interesting perspective. Web 2.0 concepts are generally positive, though strongly individualistic. While there is emphasis on team and community, much of these items focus on the individual and create tension with the natural and necessary authority in companies. Taking care of employees in general, and individuals in specific, is good for business. However, without a strong focus on customers and strong leadership, the Web 2.0 principles can lead to a lot of good work serving no purpose.