I came across something very interesting the other day, and I thought I would share it. I was reading a book about leadership (of all things), in this case, change leadership (the book is called Organization Change: Theory and Practice, by W. Warner Burke, if you are interested). The author was talking about the history of organizational change and mentioned that the very first example came from the book of Exodus in the Bible. As he told the story, I thought it was interesting enough that I would actually look up the passage. Here is the exact passage (from Exodus 18:13-27):
13 The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening. 14 When his father-in-law saw all that Moses was doing for the people, he said, “What is this you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge, while all these people stand around you from morning till evening?”
15 Moses answered him, “Because the people come to me to seek God’s will. 16 Whenever they have a dispute, it is brought to me, and I decide between the parties and inform them of God’s decrees and instructions.”
17 Moses’ father-in-law replied, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone. 19 Listen now to me and I will give you some advice, and may God be with you. You must be the people’s representative before God and bring their disputes to him. 20 Teach them his decrees and instructions, and show them the way they are to live and how they are to behave. 21 But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 22 Have them serve as judges for the people at all times, but have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves. That will make your load lighter, because they will share it with you. 23 If you do this and God so commands, you will be able to stand the strain, and all these people will go home satisfied.”
24 Moses listened to his father-in-law and did everything he said. 25 He chose capable men from all Israel and made them leaders of the people, officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 26 They served as judges for the people at all times. The difficult cases they brought to Moses, but the simple ones they decided themselves.
27 Then Moses sent his father-in-law on his way, and Jethro returned to his own country.
Pretty amazing, huh!?!? There are at least two lessons from this biblical passage. First, there is a lot of evidence to support the concept that leaders should have no more than 10 or so direct reports, and fewer than that is probably even better (there is a great article in Harvard Business Review that can be found here). Why? Simple - our brains only have so much capacity, and we can only focus well on a few things at a time. There's a reason why telephone numbers are limited to 7 digits (see the "magical number seven")! In the story above, Jethro was certainly worried about his son-in-law's capability to effectively lead and manage more than 10 individuals ("The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone."). Leadership and management (remember, they are different!) require the appropriate amount of time, and there probably is a "magical number" of direct reports for leaders and managers to do their jobs well.
Second, and I've written about this topic enough that you may have picked up on it already, Jethro appears to support the concept of "deference to expertise" ("...have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves."). Call it whatever you want (Sua Sponte, Auftragstaktik, Commander's Intent, Mission-type tactics, or Decentralization), the essence is the same. Give the decisionmaking authority to the leaders on the front lines (in the military, in business, or in health care - it's the same concept).
There are really three key points to deference to expertise:
1. Direct reports understand their leader's intent (focus on the outcome or ultimate objective). Again, in the military world, "leader's intent" is also known as mission-type tactics. The emphasis is on the outcome of the mission, not on the specific means of achieving that same outcome. In essence, it's like the old saying, "There are many wins to skin a cat" - it doesn't matter how you do it, just as long as the proverbial cat gets skinned. So, the first order of business in "deference to expertise" is making sure that all of the members of the team understand the desired outcome, goals, or objective.
2. Leaders give proper guidance. Knowing the ultimate desired outcome is not enough. Leaders also need to establish the "rules of the road" or "guard rails" in which direct reports have full operational authority. Within these boundaries or limits, the members of the team can make decisions on their own without asking for permission. However, once outside these pre-determined boundaries, they need to escalate up the chain of command. In the story above, Moses required that his "officials over thousands" come to him only with the problems that they could not solve on their own. His boundary was therefore fairly loose. Other leaders can establish more rigorous boundaries or guardrails, and that is certainly okay too. The important point is that within these boundaries, front line managers and direct reports have full decision making authority and their leaders have both the confidence and the trust that they will accomplish the objective.
3. Direct reports are appropriately trained to act independently. Perhaps the most important consideration for all of this to work is that the front line leaders and direct reports must have the requisite knowledge and training to be able to be successful. The leader's responsibility is to make sure that all of his or her direct reports are thoroughly trained (through "war games", drills, simulation, "chalk talks", huddles, etc.) so that they can be expected to make the right kinds of decisions.
It's really amazing that these are concepts that have been known and practiced for literally thousands of years! If they have stood this kind of test of time, perhaps we should pay attention more closely?
Lastly, it seems that Moses learned his lesson and then sent his father-in-law on his merry way! I wonder what Jethro thought about that - perhaps, "Gee, is that the thanks I get?"
No comments:
Post a Comment