A piece of research looking at the impact good managers had on the future careers of their direct reports used an interesting definition of a “ good “ manager. The researchers identified good managers as those who had been rapidly promoted through the ranks in this large multinational organisation. There is a certain logic to this , people who are good at their job get promoted, the better they are the quicker and more often they get promoted. Interestingly using this definition over the 10 year period of the research they identified just under a third of managers as “ good “ managers.
Would you describe a third of the managers where you work as good?
What about managers who have no desire to get further promotions either because they don’t want the hassle or because of out side commitments?
What about maverick managers who are effective in hitting performance targets and popular with staff but not senior management?
Are the managers who are promoted always good at their job or just good at the things that get you promoted, claiming the credit for the work of others , being considered committed because of the long hours they put in, considered loyal because they always support the management line?
Then again I suspect that what employees think makes a good manager isn’t the same as what the organisation thinks.
Blair Mcpherson former director author and blogger www.blairmcpherson.co.uk
