Osiris Training

My holiday reading included Head Hunters by Jo Nesbo a thriller about a number one management head hunter who is also a successful art thief. No doubt all those management recruitment consultants I came across as a Director would say that the fiction bears no relation to the reality. Well all I can say is the tone of the interview, the attempt to throw you off balance, the importance attached to a hand shake, the way you dressed and the significance of how tall you are brought it all back. And the relationship with the client well that explained a lot.

The candidate was nervous, very nervous. His handshake was weak and clammy.  He was wearing a black Armani suit, a silk tie, a white Paul Smith shirt and a pair of shinny back hand made Italian shoes.

The papers in front of me revealed the candidate came armed with excellent credentials from one of the top business schools, a spell in a national voluntary organisation and a four year success story as a senior manager in a medium size Local Authority. Never the less he was very nervous. His forehead glistened with sweat. He took a small sip of water from the glass I had placed in front of him.

I’d like you to tell me a little about your life outside of work. That is assuming you have one. He laughed uncomfortably.”I like to think so”. Good I said because they are looking for someone who has a good work life balance. They want someone who will stay with them for a number of years, a long distance runner someone who can pace themselves, not someone who will be burnt out in four years.

The candidate nodded and took another sip of water.

He was about six foot maybe a little taller and 38 a little young for the post, which was why he had dyed the hair around his temples with some subtle grey highlights. I made a note on the interview feedback form-motivated.

All the research shows that the majority of senior managers are above average height, it gives them a commanding presence, a look of authority.

Married? “Yes with two children of school age”.

And how would you describe your marriage? I left a pause for him to worry about that one and before he could answer I hit him with “do you think you will still be married in six years time after spending 80 hours a week at work?” I could see he was confused this line of questioning didn’t fit with the earlier statement on the importance attached to a work life balance.

Four seconds past before he answered. Which is at least one too many.” I would certainly hope so “he said with a practised smile but not practised enough.

Poor self image I noted down.

Does your wife work?

Who looks after the kids if one of them is ill?

You look like you keep fit.

“Yes I belong to a gym and workout 2 or 3 times a week”.

Good answer .Everyone knows organisation want senior managers who are not going to have heart attacks.

I don’t aim to recruit the best candidate but the one the client will like the best. My reputation and that of the firm is based on being able to come up with someone I know the client will like. Oh, I will give them a short list of “good” people all of whom could do the job but I will recommend only one. The others are there to flatter the client to show that there is a lot of interest from able and experienced managers for a post in their organisation. The client always likes to see one or two candidates from big organisations or people already operating at this level – which of course is why I advised them to offer more money. My success depends on being able to identify the real client the one who will really be making the decision. In some organisations that is the chief executive in others it is the leader of the council or chair of the board. My particular skill is working that out.

Blair McPherson author of Equipping managers for an uncertain future and People management in a harsh financial climate both published by www.russellhouse.co.uk

It’s one of the hardest lessons for a young ambitious manager to learn. It goes against their instincts. It’s immensely frustrating. What got you where you are won’t get you where you want to be. Your enthusiasm and boundless energy was always coupled with impatience for those less committed and less able. This wasn’t a problem it was part of your drive that enabled you to get things done. Your efforts stood out, you got the recognition they warranted and the promotions quickly followed. Then the wheels started to come off. Your intolerance of those less able and less committed offended your senior colleagues who considered your criticisms too forcibly made and your manner occasionally abrasive. Your attitude of,” if I can do it why can’t you”, did not go down well with colleagues who were finding it difficult to overcome staff resistance or budget restrictions. You were getting a reputation as someone who was not a team player. This wasn’t a problem when you rowed your own little boat but now you are part of the senior management team boat and you rowing harder does not make the boat go faster. In fact it disrupts the rhythm and pulls the boat off course.

The lesson –enthusiasm, energy and ability are not enough at this level you need insight into how your behaviour affects others.

(A case study of a management development programme to develop managers’ insight into how their behaviour affects others can be found in Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by www.russellhouse.co.uk) 

The most interesting conversations, the ones that provide a real insight are when senior managers go off the record. When a Director or Chief executive comes to give a talk to colleagues from other organisations and starts by confirming Chatham House rules apply you know it is going to have been worth turning up. If you are in a management learning set or on an MBA course this hour will be one of the very few occasions you get to learn about what it is really like to be a senior manager operating in a political environment. The session will be part gossip, part Machiavellian manoeuvres with reference to some skeletons in cupboards and some lessons learnt. You might get the real story about why the last chief executive left, how the leader of the council was ousted by their own party and what deals were struck in deciding who got what job in the cabinet. How much influence a local MP has, who plays golf with the editor of the local paper and who drinks with the regional trade union organiser. When something big goes wrong like the death of a child in care what makes some Local Authorities stand by their chief officers whilst others throw then to the wolves.

Of course you can’t repeat any of this or say who told you but you will listen to reports in the media in a different way and when you hear those carefully worded press statements you will be able to read between the lines.

Blair McPherson author of Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by www.russellhouse.co.uk

Transforming the Public Sector on the scale the government requires was always going to be difficult. A recent Ipsos Mori survey of Public Sector leaders reveals just how difficult as three quarters believe the changes will not improve services. The government should be worried if the majority of those responsible for driving through changes don’t share their belief that this will result in better services. Yet rather perversely these same Public Sector leaders think the government plans are the right thing to do! The explanation for this contradiction is that Public Sector leaders have taken on board that their number one task is to make cuts to budgets and deliver savings. Where they disagree with the government is that it is possible to do more with less. In fact many see efficiency initiatives not as delivering the same with less but delivering less with less. In other words reduced budgets even if spent in a different way will result in fewer people receiving a service and or a reduction in the quality of service.

Seven out of ten leaders polled felt that the government was forcing the pace of change too quickly by making budget cuts too fast. A view they believe is shared by the majority of the general public judging by the lobbying of local politicians and the reaction of local media.

Whilst the government still seems to think the Big Society will fill the gaps the majority of Public Sector leaders think it won’t. Almost half those polled thought it would make no difference locally.

Is it any wonder that staff, service users and the general public have picked up on this scepticism and responded with accusations that changes are not about improving services but saving money!

The reality is confirmed by the nature of senior managers ”conversations” with staff and service users. Chief executives talk to staff of standing on a burning platform to illustrate the need for fast and dramatic action. Senior managers “consult” with service user groups not over whether libraries, museums, swimming pools and sports centres will close but which ones. The debate in youth services is not about how best to spend the budget to better engage with disaffected young people but how much can we get away with cutting the budget by? The talk of increased choice and control by users of social care has been replaced by how much will we save if we restrict help and support only to those older people in greatest need. In the NHS managers now openly admit waiting lists are getting longer. No one is pretending this is improving services that is except the government.

Blair McPherson is author of a number of books on equality and management development in the public sector the latest of which is Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by www.russellhouse.co.uk  

Staff often question the need for change. They suspect that the restructuring or the new ways of working are nothing to do with improving services and probably won’t make the savings claimed. No staff think a new chief executive or leader always want to change things in order to make their mark , to show they have new ideas about how things should be done. This often involves rubbishing what went before which is particularly hard on those who sweated to make the old system dispute it’s faults work. But to the cynics who have seen it all before and who say nothing really changes and that any new way of working which addresses old faults will in turn create new problems I remind them of the Chinese tale of the dragon which attempted to eat the sun.

These days we would call it a total eclipse. To early humans it must have been a frightening sight to see the sun slowly disappearing and the world be plugged into day time darkness. Their explanation for this occurrence was that a fierce dragon was eating the sun. Every man,woman and child was urged to get out in the streets and fields,bang pots and pans and shout at the top of their voice to scare the dragon away. It worked every time!

So just because something works…….

Blair McPherson is author of Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by

www.russellhouse.co.uk

Increasingly in these austere times of budget cuts,service reductions and staffing cut backs decisions are made for financial reasons. We can no longer afford this service. There are inadequate funds for these posts. This treatment or these drugs are too expensive. The general public seems to have accepted the argument that as a nation we can’t afford the public sector services we once saw as a right. Managers have accepted that the number one target is to save money. As a result the overriding rational for decisions is financial. Every thing is justified and rationalised in financial terms. We have become so accepting of this that other considerations are barely mentioned and if they are it is only to acknowledge they will be ” unpleasant” ,”harsh” and “unpopular “but never the less are dictated by the budget.

It’s rather like that American car company that discovered a potentially dangerous fault in one of their models. After considering their options , the management decided not to alert the public. They had “worked the numbers” and calculated that it would be more expensive to organise a national recall of the affected vehicles than to pay damages to the injured and the relatives of those killed. A financial decision.

Do we really want this type of logic applied to the NHS?

Blair McPherson author of EQuipping managers are an uncertain future and People management in a harsh financial climate both published by www.russellhouse.co.uk

In his hospital bed he looked like a frail old man. The fall had shaken his confidence. He had lain there all night on the floor until the meals on wheels people found him. He wanted to go home. The doctor wanted him out of the bed. But there was a problem. The home visit with the OT and the social worker had revealed a life times collection of pornography. It was not the content of the magazines, the OT and social worker considered themselves unshockable,it was the sheer volume. Floor to ceiling porn. The hallway had magazines two deep and six foot high either side leaving a narrow passage way from front door to kitchen. The front room had magazines staked high on the table and all the chairs. It was the same up stairs, only the bathroom and kitchen were free of his reading material. There was a real danger that one of these towers of porn would collapse on to you to say nothing of the fire hazard that this ware house of adult literature presented.

He wanted to go home. The hospital wanted him to go home. The social worker wanted him to go home but he would need more than just meals on wheels. He needed a home help. The home help supervisor visited and said noway can I let my ” girls” visit this house. The problem was not the pornography or providing support to a ” sad dirty old man” but a Health and safety issue. The house was to cluttered to be a safe work environment. The magazines would have to go.

The social worker explained the situation to the ward staff but emphasised that neither she nor the home help could throw out anything belonging to the patient against his wishes. He didn’t see why he should have to throw away any of his collection.

There was a brief discussion as to whether this behaviour constituted some sort of mental health problem but no one seriously thought it did. Some one needed to take the decision to clear the clutter. There was a real risk of a prolonged stay in hospital followed by a transfer to an Old Peoples Home something he didn’t want and didn’t need. In the end the in the absence of any relatives the social services manager responsible for the care budget made a financial decision. A clean up team was sent in.

Blair McPherson is author of Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by

www.russellhouse.co.uk

It starts earlier each year. I remember when no one gave it a thought before Christmas. August used to be the quiet month the members were all on holiday and there were no committee meetings,no reports to write and no briefings to give. Now there are BLack berries so even when on ” holiday” they are in touch .

Whilst you were sunning yourself on some foreign beach they were working out the next round of budget cuts. The pressure is on to come up with ways of delivering even more savings. “If we don’t come up with the proposals then someone else will. Do you think we will like their proposals? Well I am not prepared to take the risk so I want detailed costed proposals.”

Since all these called easy saving have already been made the instructions will be to think ” outside the box”. This is not the green light to be radical and propose what was previously politically unacceptable. Just the opposite it is the requirement to come up with a new rational and robust data for doing what the leadership already water to do.

Good luck and welcome back.

www.blairmcpherson.co.uk author of EQuipping managers for an uncertain future published by www.Russellhouse.co.uk

The weekend papers were again full of criticism of the former Prime Minister. This time it is his one time chancellor who is sticking the boot in. Yet again it is an attack on the mans personality not his policies,it’s a savage criticism of his management style not his achievements. He stands accused of being a bully who did not tolerate dissent and didn’t encourage debate.

The Hypocrisy in all this is the pretence that this is an unacceptable and untypical management style when in fact it is part of a widespread culture in politics and business. The people who rise to the top tend to be the scary bullies. They are the ones with the personalities so dominant and self belief so uncritical that people around them shrink. They promote Yes Men and Yes Women. Their designs and mistakes go unchallenged. With out genuine debate collective responsibility becomes a question of personal loyalty or fear. Senior colleagues own the decisions through commitment to the leader or through fear of the leader. Neither make for good decisions.

If we don’t want this type of leadership and we shouldn’t then we need to stop focusing on the individual and concentrate on the merits of the arguments. We need people who will stand up to the bullies not Yes Men and Women.

www.blairmcpherson.co.uk Author of EQuipping managers for an uncertain future published by www.russellhuose.co.uk