Comments on the Common Failures of Management

Introduction

Both working in roles managing workers and being under other managers, I have noticed a few key failures that lead to rampant inefficiency and uncertain work environments. The most insidious aspect is that these issues can easily creep up even under otherwise effective management, and the remedies become increasingly difficult to implement. The primary issue comes down to a lack of accountability at all levels of the organization. Accountability gives visibility into inefficiencies, when it is lacking at the highest level there is no chance you can effectively hold those below you to a higher standard. The other issue is a lack of shared vision, leaving no “why” to power the engine. Finally, there is a stubbornness to adopt tools that can lead to faster, higher quality outcomes. I have been guilty of all these issues at the top level, and even with the best intentions it can feel like a complete quagmire to improve.

The Accountability Issue

Sadly, I think it is a very common experience for people to get a new job and not know how they are doing. Even worse, this can stretch on throughout an employee’s entire tenure. Make it clear what everyone on the team, regardless of their position’s level, is accountable for. This creates a sense of ownership over problems. I think a common misconception is that you need to pay people more for them to care. Conversely, I think the only way to make someone care is to give them a reason to care. You can easily end up in a situation where you are paying someone more for the same or even less work than they were doing before, simply because you thought paying them more would spark a sense of ownership.

Create a clear chain of accountable stakeholders. Hold everyone to a clear, open standard. Open communication is vital, if a manager is not holding up their end, anyone should be able to call them out. The book Radical Candor by Kim Scott focuses a lot on how to create an environment of accountability, but emphasizes that this starts at the highest level of the organization. Particularly, I would question if employees feel that they can comfortably push back on their managers. Managers should seek to build a culture wherein they are frequently publicly challenged. However, critique from management down should be delivered one-on-one. The style and cadence of meetings are the most direct variables that can be tweaked to build this culture.

Build out a collection of KPIs for each department/section of your business. Share these openly, let people know that this is something they will be judged on. Not only does this encourage people who are doing well (now they know they are doing well), but it also gives a roadmap for improvement. This roadmap is vital because it gives management a way to guide underperformers, it gives underperformers a way to know they are improving, and if you face a situation where you must let someone go, you have a clear paper trail documenting why. The worst-case scenario when firing someone is that they did not know they were not doing well.

Effective Meetings

Do you only have top-level meetings? Do your employees feel they have a voice? It is frighteningly easy to get into a groove of minimal meetings, and to have those meetings only include the top-level stakeholders. While it is important for leadership to be in alignment and present a common message, that is only part of the equation. Find ways to include and unify everyone on the front lines.

In the context of restaurants, I think a common cadence for meetings is to have infrequent management meetings (monthly or even quarterly) and then disseminate daily directives through pre-shift meetings. These pre-shift meetings generally contain tight scripts for what to do that shift: what specials to push, who to impress, etc. While this might create some common goals for the day, it does nothing to inspire a bigger vision amongst the team. They feel like a lecture and there are not clear goals. It may impress upon one person that they should sell x specials, and upon another that they just need to read a script to every table.

These types of daily meetings have a purpose, I don’t think they should be scorned by any means. Instead, they should be coupled with broader meetings that build a common understanding of the long-term goals of the business. Do we want to win a James Beard award or do we want to launch a franchise? These disparate visions can seem exactly the same if you only focus on the day-to-day. Sharing the broader vision gives guidance to everyone on where their energy is best spent, of course every restaurant wants to be hospitable, but do we want to do that by being fast or by creating an experience?

Unreasonable Hospitality by Will Guidara outlines two meetings that, complemented with pre-shifts, helped instill the lofty goals of an early Eleven Madison Park upon a split team. First is the idea of involving all employees in creative decisions. Meet with management and set general goals, but then open the floor to your staff to pitch anything. Make an effort to flip the traditional dynamic to create an open, creative space. EMP did this by having staff work in groups to come up with new ideas, while front-of-house managers cooked them sandwiches and back-of-house management took their orders. It is a simple idea that could understandably create a non-traditional environment where people feel more open to sharing their ideas, without the normal day-to-day pressures. And the business will benefit from getting 10x+ the ideas they could possibly generate at the top-level.

The other type of meeting, which I am particularly fond of, was what EMP called “Happy Hour.” This was a monthly meeting where any employee could present to the entire group, on any subject. Maybe a barista has been studying how to make homemade pasta, or a dishwasher has an idea for a more efficient way to bus during caterings. These presentations don’t even need to be related to the business, the biggest impact they have is building a connection amongst the team and offering an opportunity for employees to 1) express themselves, and 2) develop professionally by presenting. I think one of the most underrated skills is the ability to communicate a message clearly, and even if a presenter has a topic completely unfocused from the business, they are developing this crucial skill.

My final note for meeting cadence would be establishing a consistent and purposeful rhythm for management meetings. Build out a template for holding short and effective weekly meetings, keep them goal focused and with actionable outcomes. Take a bird’s eye view frequently: quarterly meetings to assess progress towards yearly goals, yearly meetings to establish those goals, etc. I have noticed that it can be hard for people that are so singularly focused on day-to-day operations going smoothly to “step out” of that viewpoint to make broad assessments. It may be beneficial to make meetings with a zoomed out focus off-sites. Even just meeting at the pub next door could be all that’s needed to get everyone pulled out of the now of the issue.

Automation Avoidance

Another crucial failure I see in management is an active effort to avoid automation. Businesses nowadays have so many ways to leverage technology to reduce workload, but few take them. I think this stems from three main places: I don’t want to be replaced, I don’t want my team to be replaced, and we can’t learn or maintain this system.

• For the first point, if a program can replace you as a manager, you are not doing enough outside of the operational aspects of the job. Use this opportunity to see how you can act as a lever for those on your team.
• If you are afraid of replacing members of the team, you have people with too narrow of responsibilities—either due to incompetence in other areas or out of an abundance of staff. If you can’t use this as an opportunity to grow the affected employee, you are overstaffed or they are lacking. Either way, it is hard to argue that they should not have already been let go.

• For the final part, there may be a less direct answer. I think these sentiments are often exaggerated out of stubbornness or artificially propped up to support the two prior cases. While it is good to know your limitations, don’t assume these limitations without effort. That is like picky eaters who never actually try something new, but insist that “I know I don’t like it.” There are so, so many resources nowadays to learn new skills that it is beyond arrogant to not at least try. I am by no means a proponent of AI, but everyone essentially has 24/7 access to personal tech support and tutors of reasonable quality. The timing could not be better to learn a new skill, especially if the upside could bolster your entire business/team.

Think of software as an employee. Sure, it may be expensive to pay $300/m for reservation software when you can do it yourself. But, then you create a system that is difficult for others to replicate and entangle yourself as the sole person in charge of this process. In the end, you pay far more per year to have yourself do everything and some people do a half-assed job when you are unavailable. Even at the $1,000-$2,000/m software costs that are common among restaurants, if it can simplify 90% of your operation that is surely worth it (not to mention cheaper than minimum wage).

All the time you can save automating busy-work is leftover, free for you to dedicate to your core competencies. Less time splitting checks gives servers more time to build a connection with their tables, less time processing inventory leaves chefs with more free time to innovate on new menus. Every business in your given industry shares the same bottlenecks. Having these bottlenecks does not differentiate you to the customer. How much better could you be than the competition by minimizing these?

Fast-paced Environments, Incremental Change

Most of my experience comes from restaurants, which are undoubtedly a fast-paced workplace. When you are moving at this speed, these issues compound quickly. I would like to think that I am pretty aware of these issues and how to mitigate them, but I have absolutely propagated them under the pressure of such an environment. This goes back to accountability, but it is vital to create a culture where everyone can call out aspects of the business that are slipping.

What I wish I had done in the past is ease the treading of water. You feel like the day-to-day is an impossible struggle to keep pace with and you are exhausted at the end of the day. So, in the end, you go back the next day without making any meaningful changes. It feels like you are in survival mode, so any big initiatives flag as flamboyant. And this was likely a good instinct, big initiatives require follow through that might not be possible without the right foundations. But, incremental changes every week, every month, and so on would have compounded into a huge transformation.

Spend a week automating some process, now you have more free time. Focus that free time on building a culture of accountability. So on and so forth. It doesn’t, and absolutely won’t, happen in a day. All positive change is incremental, find those small ways to improve and focus a small portion of your energy there. Big change is tempting because it feels like a magic bullet, but following through is an even bigger task and failing to do so will only exacerbate the firm’s issues.