What the Bible Says About Letting Go

• Tweet

• Post

• Share

• Save

• Get PDF

• Buy Copies

• Print

If I've heard it once, I've heard it a thousand times: to overcome the stresses and strains of a fast-growing organization, the chief executive must delegate responsibility.

I've been to seminars on the subject. I've read business books that deal with it. But somehow the people talking and writing about delegating fail to deal with the most important issues. That shouldn't be surprising. After all, how many have had hundreds of people working for them? How many have had to stand by as a subordinate screwed up a task that the CEO could do better? How many have had to train dozens of new employees at a time?

Unfortunately, most of these people aren't in a position to appreciate that the obstacles to delegating successfully are essentially subjective in nature. As the head of a restaurant company with nearly $15 million in annual sales and five establishments cared for by 500 employees, I am in such a position.

It's one thing to hear or read about how the chief executive's role changes as he or she delegates, but it's another thing to experience it. I found living through it to be awful.

In trying to delegate, I've encountered four problems. These are really my problems, not ones having to do with my company. The first and most obvious problem was watching someone mess up a task I could do easily in half the time. I had to learn to keep my mouth shut since interceding would frustrate my new subordinate—not to mention use up the time I wanted to save. Handing over my company—my baby—to others and standing by as they did things their own way sorely tested my faith in humankind.

The second problem had to do with identity, specifically mine. Delegating means shifting from the role of specialist—be it in finance, marketing, or whatever—to that of generalist. It means becoming a leader, and leaders don't have precise job definitions. I had to give up the particular skills for which I was known and the gratification that went with applying them. I had to surrender the greatest pleasures of my professional life.

Third was the problem of competitiveness. As an entrepreneur I am extremely competitive, and I had to watch while others reached ability levels superior to my own. I could no longer enjoy being unrivaled at various jobs—cooking, tending bar, training new workers. Delegating means letting others become the experts and hence the best.

Finally there was the problem of learning a whole new job. Now I had to decide where the organization should go, secure agreement from subordinates, and keep the company on track. Learning this new job meant leaving my comfort zone for the unknown. It meant learning the art of leadership.

Fortunately, I had no choice in the matter because the organization's size had caught up with me. Six-and seven-day weeks, numerous assistants, and ingenious organization of my life weren't enough. The demands on my time associated with serving more than one million people each year were seemingly infinite. I was swamped. I realized I had to make the transition from entrepreneur to leader. I would have to find satisfaction in coaching and planning instead of doing.

To ease this transition, I came up with a three-part approach that I'll pass on to you. It won't eliminate the trauma inherent in delegating, but it may make the change a lot less painful. It goes like this:

Recruit the best people.

Practice "what and why" management.

Learn to think effectively.

Recruit the Best

With their limited financial resources, new companies usually cannot attract top-notch people at start-up. But as an enterprise grows, its managerial requirements often increase beyond the capabilities of the original cadre. The added work load moves to the CEO. He or she may simply be unable to handle all the tasks at hand. So the question becomes who is competent to take over a share of the CEO's work.

In 1983, when the three restaurants, the service company, and the fresh-fish wholesaler that made up Restaurant Services had reached $10 million in sales, I realized we could no longer afford to have me as the hero in every arena. I had to get some help. I came to realize that the sum of a company is really its human resources, and high-quality people are the base from which an organization can expand. If a company's survival and growth depend on mature judgment, then having the best possible decision makers is vital.

Recruiting was difficult for me. Headhunters are expensive, and newspaper ads unreliable. After all, what worthy prospects scan the classified ads for their jobs? High-quality people are already working, not on the street.

Fortunately, I've learned other recruiting methods. Purveyors and suppliers have proven to be an excellent recruiting source because they know the people in our business. So my key managers and I often ask them for the names of superior performers interested in moving to more challenging positions. We also use industry seminars for recruiting, selecting them according to the kind of applicant we want: finance, human resource development, marketing. At seminars, we find ambitious people interested in improving themselves. During coffee and lunch breaks, we introduce ourselves and exchange business cards.

The best approach is the one most often used by Silicon Valley recruiters. They telephone potential applicants directly. It sounds difficult but really isn't. First we describe the job and its benefits, including the salary range. The recruiter does this from a fact sheet to keep the conversation running smoothly. Then the recruiter asks the candidate if he or she is interested or knows someone who might be interested. More than 80% of the people called want to talk with us or suggest other candidates.

Interviewing is the next important step. I have learned it's best to handle this task myself. For key people I don't conduct interviews in the normal sense but have open-ended discussions over a two-or three-month period. Five meetings or more are not too many to allow both sides to examine each other and to set expectations. I should emphasize that in talking with these candidates I stress our problems as well as our strengths because I have found that people appreciate candor. Furthermore, a good candidate welcomes the prospect of a challenge. Management is, after all, largely problem solving.

It's helpful to have at least one lunch or dinner with the spouse and the candidate. A job change is a major event, and the involvement of the marriage partner is important. If the spouse supports the decision, the likelihood of the applicant's acceptance of the job offer is greater.

I've worked hard to attract top-quality people. I've done whatever I can manage in the way of enticements and more. I have made available portions of my stock, paid people out of my own pocket to keep known salaries in equilibrium, created costly, unneeded temporary positions, and ruined more budgets than I care to recall.

There is one important caveat to register here. Large companies can promote from within, while small companies, as I said, often lack the talent. Unfortunately, some people in your organization may think they have the right stuff, despite their limitations. For instance, when I recruited a product developer, two managers quit. I did the right thing, but at a cost.

"What & Why" Management

In start-up companies, the visions are usually the entrepreneurs'—they have the clear ideas about the product or service they plan to offer. Moreover, they often have to be in all places at all times, taking care of every detail. Unfortunately, this 100% hands-on management does not permit an entrepreneur's staff to mature. Why think, if the boss has all the answers? Inadvertently, an entrepreneur usurps employees' responsibilities. Worse, people often perform well because they know the owner is right there. What happens when the owner is away?

My hands-on approach hit the shear point with the opening of our third restaurant. I needed a simple and immediately recallable, yet effective, management system. (Honestly, who can remember Maslow's hierarchy of needs, let alone use it, during a meeting?) To this end, I developed an approach I call "what and why" management and made it the organization's leadership style.

Underlying the "what" is the notion that employees cannot do what is expected without training and without a thorough understanding of their work. The instruction is behavior oriented: we show, they practice, and we feed back. This procedure is repeated until employees reach the skill levels we are seeking. The key to success in this effort is 100% focus. Complete focus while teaching the "what" is so important that we set aside time on managers' schedules solely for instruction and observation.

As an aid in teaching "what," we have developed job requirement evaluations. These are two-page forms listing key employee behaviors. Managers use them as a reference when observing and scoring employees. We reward good performance with gift certificates to our restaurants and handle poor performance by returning to teaching of the "what" and giving a thorough explanation of the "why."

The restaurant managers are periodically evaluated in manager-employee coaching sessions by home-office staff. These scores are a big part of our managers' performance evaluations. Managers advance largely on the basis of their ability and willingness to teach. One young cocktail server who was especially proficient at teaching others our philosophy worked through the ranks to become a restaurant manager in 36 months.

The "why" part of the approach is vital because it promotes values. Employees are more likely to be motivated when they understand why they must behave a certain way than when they are simply given rules. We all want to believe in what we're doing, and we want to know the importance of our work. Knowing the "why" fulfills these needs and helps develop a successful organization.

At the end of "why" explanations we ask: "Does that make sense? Do you agree?" If the answer to these questions is no, we give the employees a chance to explain their reasoning. In this way, we open what is often a mutually educational dialogue.

In one instance, our product developer and the chef of our newest restaurant had worked hard to adapt a lovely Mexican dish, prawns Veracruzana, for the restaurant. I opposed including it on the menu because it didn't fit our American cuisine image and reminded them that a clear theme is essential to a restaurant's success.

The chef and several others pointed out that the proposed offering was colorful, cost-effective, and delicious. Besides, why shortchange the guest because of a name? Good point. We came up with an American name, prawns piquant, put it on the menu, and the item is now a best-seller.

Another time, I devised a new bar concept to counter flagging spirits sales, which had been hurt by tougher drinking laws and by society's shift away from drinking alcohol. I struggled to fashion a new concept for our bars that emphasized nonalcoholic beverages with the food. I wanted to call it the NewBar because, in my opinion, it captured society's changing view of what a bar should be. I was well along in graphic design when my partner told me the name was confusing. Years ago his objection would have caused a row. Now I ask why…and listen.

He pointed out that the bars wouldn't look new to guests because we weren't going to remodel them. Why remodel bars that had been painted by Leroy Nieman, immortalized in the Guinness Book of World Records, and featured in Time and the New York Times? He convinced me that the name NewBar would have to go.

So we devised different plans, which called for a two-by-three-foot menu featuring 25 categories with more than 350 selections. As we talked, it became clear that we were shaping an extension of our current concept, not rolling out a new bar. We settled on a name: BestBar. Management and staff alike applauded the name, so that's what we call the concept.

This redirection never would have taken place if I had still had my old hands-on management approach. It took the scrutiny inherent in what and why management to come up with a better solution. The shoot-from-the-hip directives of the past have now been replaced by more thoughtful processes.

I readily acknowledge, however, that what and why management doesn't always work. On occasion, no amount of dialogue can overcome my vision of things or bring me to the other side's viewpoint. That's when I exercise the captain's prerogative. I remind my people that sometimes the captain must steer the ship into uncharted waters. I tell them that I assume full responsibility for the course I've set and then ask for their support. I tell them that trust must be part of the voyage and that it's their responsibility to help me sail the ship into the unknown.

Thinking Effectively

Over the past 30 months, I've hired many competent people, allowing me to give up overseeing restaurants, developing recipes, writing menus, and a variety of other cherished activities. Now I have time to think. A leader must continually ask and answer the question, "What's next?" An organization can't move ahead without a clear picture of where it's going. Once the CEO has envisioned the organization's future, he or she can share that image with others. It's this shared vision that generates the impetus for growth.

What is thinking? Maybe the place to begin is by examining what thinking is not. Thinking is not reading, meeting, routine reporting, listening, observing, or "working."

Rather, it has more to do with being quiet, apart, reflective, and focused.

Real thinking is simply permitting one's mind to call up ideas not previously considered. When allowed to, it does so with remarkable aplomb. In a sense, thinking is dreaming the organization's future. It's the ability to see tomorrow and construct the company's ideal state. It's the ability to get excited about the possibilities of the future.

This envisioning process isn't mystical, silly stuff, nor is it the fatuous pap offered up by some pop psychologists: "Imagine and it will be." Rather, it's the brain-straining toil, the demanding work of constructing the organization's ideal state and ascertaining the steps required to achieve it.

Like many entrepreneurs, I used to see work as dynamic activity—moving, doing, talking. The idea of sitting quietly and thinking seemed alien, especially when a full free day loomed ahead. Yet it's essential to discipline yourself to use your time to build the organization's vision.

Faced with 10 to 15 meetings a week, I relish my thinking time and guard it jealously. I set aside time to work out answers to "What's next?" What is the next generation of products? What will the organization's future management structure look like? What remaining cherished roles can I hand over? How is society changing, and how does that affect the company? How will the company's future vision be financed? The questions go on and on. That's what thinking is about. If you don't think about where the company is going, who will?

Here are four rules that have helped me think better:

1. View thinking as a strategy. Thinking is the best way to resolve difficulties. Maintain faith in your ability to think your way out of problems. Recognize the difference between worrying and thinking. The former is repeated, needless problem analysis while the latter is solution generation.

Sometimes I can't sleep because of business concerns, so I convert worrying to thinking by getting up and listing troubling problems and possible solutions. After a few minutes of jotting notes, I invariably go back to bed and sleep soundly.

2. Schedule large blocks of uninterrupted time. Because thinking takes time, it must be scheduled. Carve out large blocks of uninterrupted time during periods when you are at your best. I have found that the beginning of the week is my prime time, so I schedule Monday as my thinking day. If I have much to think about, I even schedule an entire week just for that purpose.

3. Stay focused on relevant topics. Pummel your mind until it produces the quality thinking you seek. The ideas are there; you ferret them out.

4. Record, sort, and save your thoughts. Ideas are the product of your work; they must be recorded, sorted, and saved. Try writing them on 3 x 5 cards, one idea per card, so that they remain "mobile." Use a handheld recorder to capture thoughts while driving. Maintain topic files as repositories for your observations. Files of ideas about the organization's future are your most important store of information.

I have learned to delegate effectively in large measure by accepting the fact that it's an emotionally wrenching process. But I have eased the way by recruiting superior performers, using what and why management, and increasing my available thinking time. The rules are simple, and they foster company growth. They are doing that for our company.

A version of this article appeared in the September 1986 issue of Harvard Business Review.

What the Bible Says About Letting Go

Source: https://hbr.org/1986/09/letting-go

Share :