Paul Maritz make a valid point when he expressed that managing 100 people is different from managing 1,000 people. He explains that when he manages more individuals it requires him to be less personal and think things on a broader scale. Managing more individuals also prevents him from knowing details about certain topics. In a sense, he sets an overall goal for his employees rather than having 'one-on-one' time with each employee.
He also mentions that with a larger group, he isn't able to receive immediate feedback from his employees. He has to critique his own work in order to figure out if he is doing a phenomenal job. I disagree with that. I can admit, I never managed 1000 employees before, but I'm sure he's capable of receiving some kind of immediate feedback from his employees. From experience, surveys take forever (especially if they are lengthy), but, he could hold group discussions every once in a while and speak with his employees. He doesn't have to talk with all of them but he could have key individuals report to him. It may take a day out of his busy schedule but I'm sure it's worth the effort when he has the results at the end of the day. He could have a group meeting with the key individuals or he could meet with them individually. He even admits himself that successful people are 'ones who try to structure their lives to learn and get feedback and be self-aware'.
He discusses that a in any great leader you'll find four personality traits. The have to be a strategist, a class manager, customer
oriented, and an enforcer. He explained that you will find at least two of the personality traits rather than all four in a leader. I never thought twice about the idea. Thinking about the leaders in my life I can safely say that I met someone who has at least three of the characteristics. In theory, all of them clash with one another. There is a possibility that employees won't view you as customer oriented' if you are an enforcer. I agree that these are ideal characteristics, but I also believe that leaders are capable of having more than two of the characteristics.
On the other hand, it is hard for teams to have all four characteristics
and harmony. From experience, teams always have some kind of clash (even if it's minor). I also can agree that when it comes to teams, they always inhibit two of the characteristics. It is hard to find the 'perfect team'. The important part is how they handle the situation. Handling the situation efficiently will allow faster progress in a project and obstacles can be solved at a faster rate.
Paul Maritz brought up some valid points. Some of them I definitely disagreed with, but I also agreed with some of his statements. Managers have to take a different approach when they are managing 1000 people rather than 100. Paul seems like an experienced manager, but I would've taken a different approach to things. From experience, employees work harder when they feel like they matter within an industry. Employees tend to work harder without thinking twice about it if they have nothing to worry about. I'm sure 1,000 employees is a lot to manage and become personal with, but the employees must always know that the company will always take care of them.
Click here to view the interview.
WordPress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment