Virtually all leaders espouse the benefits of a strong management team. However, they use starkly different levers to build one. These differences in philosophy and approach frequently differentiate those who advance to and succeed at the executive level — and those who stay in the ranks of middle management.
When you ask leaders how they build a strong management team, the answers are revealing. Many managers proudly describe the team-building initiatives they’ve pursued to create a sense of staff cohesion and morale. Others talk about scheduling team meetings to clarify roles and responsibilities within the group or the staff members they’ve sent to training programs. Don’t get me wrong. These are all useful things to do, and successful executives invest time in them periodically. But for the senior-level executive, talent is king, and as a result the top leaders devote the bulk of their effort to identifying and attracting strong players who, collectively, form a strong management team. In addition they operate from a plan — however confidential it may be — to strengthen the team year over year.
When it comes to building management strength, these executives are similar to professional sports coaches. They want their teams to win this year, that is, to achieve their annual goals and objectives. But they also want the talent on the team to be better the next year — and the year after — to compete and win at the highest level. Such executives base their efforts to build team strength on the answers to two fundamental questions:
- Where do I need to spend my time and focus my energies? On which issues and priorities can I add the greatest value to the business?
- What skills and expertise do I need on the team to accomplish the unit’s goals and allow me to play that value-added role?
In a pragmatic way such executives see their teams as extensions of themselves, and use them to free up bandwidth for critical executive-level activities — for example, setting strategy, managing relationships with customers and other external stakeholders, influencing peers to endorse new initiatives, and identifying and driving the next major innovation to improve performance dramatically.
Beyond adopting this kind of thinking, such leaders employ several steps to build and continuously upgrade their team. Rather than wait for an opening, they troll for talent both inside the organization and externally to find people to add to the team when the time is right. For example, Tim Sheahan, Chief Financial Officer for a large division of a multi-national corporation, aspires to become CFO of a Fortune 100 company in the future. (For confidentiality purposes, all names in this post have been changed.)
For a number of years he has taken steps to cultivate what he describes as “Team Sheahan.” At meetings of the corporation’s finance managers, Tim makes a point to spend time with lower-level staff members to establish a personal bond. He is active in a number of outside finance groups and similarly devotes time at their conferences to seek out and get to know finance talent outside the company. Over the years he has promoted a number of finance managers out of his organization and has had great success in replacing them with talented staff from inside the company as well as outside.
Executives like Tim are judicious about how they provide feedback and whom they coach. Although they provide direct and constructive feedback to average performers or step in to help a staff member address a performance problem, they tend to reserve in-depth coaching for their top performers — unlike other managers who, often with the best of intentions, allocate an inordinate amount of time trying to help marginal performers succeed. Rather than allow a performance problem to fester, successful executives step up to help the individual improve, move to a more appropriate position within the company or, if necessary, transition to another organization where they would be a better fit.
Consider Ann Berkley’s experience when she was named Vice President of Marketing for a major division of a large consumer products company. Ann was a highly-experienced marketer who quickly assessed her new team and established a set of priorities to grow her business, one of which was to drive new product innovation. The manager of product development on the team that Ann inherited was Tom Shelton, a long-time employee who was well-liked within the company. While Tom was not a classically trained marketer, his prior experience included sales administration and the management of existing brands. Ann quickly saw that the performance of Tom and his group would be key to the success of her strategy.
Shortly after taking over as VP of Marketing, Ann asked Tom to put together a formal review of the new product development group and asked for his ideas on ways to drive greater product innovation. Unfortunately, when the two met to review his plan, they were both disappointed in the results since the ideas Tom put forward were stale and unlikely to drive new product growth. At that point Ann began to take steps to find Tom a new position within the company more in line with his prior experience. Interestingly, although Ann’s peers expressed great respect and affection for Tom, there were no takers. The overall feedback from the other groups was that Tom, although the “soul of the company,” had not pushed himself to upgrade his skills as the competitive pressures surrounding the company had grown.
Six months after Ann assumed her position as VP of Marketing, Tom left the company and was replaced by a new hire who ultimately led the launch of several breakthrough products. This story had a happy ending since Tom took stock of his career, shifted to a new job in financial management, and has been extremely successful. Although no executive relishes having to deal with a situation like Tom, those like Ann Berkley recognize the importance of every position — or “roster spot” — on the team and understand the positive impact that one or two new players can have on team motivation as the performance bar within the group is raised.
Although supportive of traditional training programs, such leaders rely on new, “stretch” assignments to develop their future stars. Their career discussions with top performers are designed to help the leader understand the individual’s career goals and the experiences they are most interested in having.
This allows them to create new job assignments that will motivate the staff member and build new skills and perspectives on the business. They are prepared to let their emerging stars move on to new jobs within the organization, recognizing that doing so both creates opportunities to bring in new talent and showcases their talent development abilities. Over time, these executives develop reputations as the kind of leader to whom young, up-and-coming people want to hitch their career wagon. It’s a win for the company, too — because in a world of ever increasing competition, if an organization’s not constantly growing its management strength, it’s in grave danger of falling behind.
