Meet the guest. Michael Walsh is a Vancouver-based business strategist, author of Business Growth by Design, and founder of Walsh Business Growth Institute, the international consultancy he’s run since 1995 to help owners scale sustainably and earn the “freedom dividend” they started their companies for.
In Part 12 of our ongoing Freedom by Design series, Michael brings a deceptively simple napkin scribble:
“Grow Managers – Best Boss / Worst Boss. Do bad bosses know they’re bad?”
Those three lines crack open one of the biggest constraints to growth: the gulf between technical excellence and people leadership. As Michael tells me:
“The truth is that being a middle manager is probably the toughest job in any company.”
“The skills it takes to deliver a result are very different from the skills it takes to support somebody else to generate the result.”
Why “Best Boss / Worst Boss” is More Than a Fun Ice-Breaker
When Michael runs this exercise with leadership teams, he first asks everyone to list the best boss they’ve ever had and what made that person great. Patterns emerge fast: clear communication, mentorship, celebrating wins, “walking the talk,” and structuring roles for success.
Then he flips it: list the worst boss and why. Out pour traits like micromanagement, credit-stealing, indecision, and absenteeism. The power is in the contrast. Leaders suddenly see that greatness isn’t mysterious—nor is mediocrity accidental.
But the kicker is Michael’s final question: “Do bad bosses know they’re bad?” Most don’t. Self-awareness—bolstered by data, feedback loops, and intentional development—is the lever that turns average managers into growth multipliers.
The Hidden Cost of Un-Trained Managers
Promoting a rock-star individual contributor without equipping them to lead is like handing a talented chef a chainsaw and saying, “Now go build the restaurant.” Skill transfer fails, engagement drops, and A-players walk. Michael argues that 21st-century growth depends on deliberately growing managers who can translate talent into performance:
“Your deliverable as a manager is the expertise of your people.”
That means shifting from “command and control” to coaching, designing feedback systems that surface truth quickly, and rewarding leaders who create more leaders—not just more output.
5 Key Takeaways & Action Steps (no tables, just straight talk)
1. Manager is a distinct profession, not a reward. Take Action: Before promoting, map the new role’s core leadership competencies and assess candidates against them—don’t rely on technical prowess alone.
2. Self-awareness is the first management skill. Take
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Govindh Jayaraman (00:02):
Michael Walsh. Welcome back to paper napkin wisdom. I'm excited to continue the series with you today.
Michael Walsh (00:09):
Excellent.
Govindh Jayaraman (00:10):
All right. So we've been talking about
teams a lot we've been talking about, you know, training and growing your people
understanding. And I think this fundamental thing is the core of your company used to be perceived as generating profit and generating customer value. We've added this 3rd dimension around professional growth. But the team have to be part of the results in order that to exist. And we talked about a number of things that related to that. And after talking about teams, we started talking about this idea of managers, and we just sort of touched on that last episode. And we're getting into growing your managers, because
(00:47):
teams need managers. Teams need leadership.
And today's napkin is about growing your managers. And it says, grow managers. Best boss
dash worst bosh. And here's the the best part. Do bad bosses know they're bad.
and that's a great question. So kick us off there. Why did you share this one with me?
Michael Walsh (01:08):
Well, because there's a few things right, because, 1st of all, there's this whole conundrum around management.
The truth is that being a middle manager is probably the toughest job in any company.
I mean, quite often people have multiple bosses, multiple employees and nobody listens. They're expected to do a whole bunch of things. And and you know they figure well, you know your job, you know, you know your people. So just handle it.
(01:36):
And so people actually are not trained for management yet they're expected to perform, and it has such a huge impact on everything that happens in a company, especially a service-based company that's driven by the expertise of their people. That is your deliverable. And so
Govindh Jayaraman (01:53):
Like the reason why managers at this middle level become managers is usually because they're really good at doing the job.
It's not that they're really good at being managers. It's just they're really good at being in the job. So they think because you're so good at being in the job. We'll just make you in charge of a bunch of people who are doing this work
Michael Walsh (02:14):
And from one perspective it makes sense because it's like, Well, I trust this person to get the job done so with themselves. Then they're probably the one I would trust most to work with my team to get the results, because I do have that level of trust and confidence in them.
and it's misplaced
Govindh Jayaraman (02:34):
Yeah. And and not only is it misplaced, but I
going backward, we're not training them for the results we want, because the results are different when you're in that role
Michael Walsh (02:46):
Well, well, in fact, that's exactly why it's misplaced. You're absolutely right.
Govindh Jayaraman (02:49):
Good.
Michael Walsh (02:50):
Here's the thing. The skills it takes to deliver a result are very different from the skills it takes to support somebody else, to generate the result. And so, and
the chasm between 20th century
business operations and 21st century business operations is probably the widest here. This is the place. It shows up the most. So when we talked earlier about the difference between a well-oiled machine and an intelligent ecosystem where it, where it lands, is smack dab in the middle of the lap of the person who's in management
Govindh Jayaraman (03:26):
Right right now.
I I think I think that there's so. So what goes into being
a best boss? Let's let's start aspirationally right. What should
Michael Walsh (03:39):
Well, I actually, I know
Govindh Jayaraman (03:41):
You're gonna go the other way.
Michael Walsh (03:43):
No, I'm not gonna go the other way. I'm gonna take a step back and add.
Okay, so the 1st thing I'd like to say is is.
let's define management because people don't know what management is. So I have a definition that I actually use in the book. It's to take talents of people and turn them into performance. Basically.
So to take the talented people and turn it into performance. There's a lot of different people have done definitions, and I believe that one I got from Marcus Buckingham. Of course Buckingham was one of the lead people at the Gallup organization. When they were doing all their employment engagement things. And then he's since opened his own internationally renowned research company and everything he does is based on not anecdotal information, but empirical data.
(04:28):
So so what he's done. And he's saying, Listen, if you define managers as people who take talents of people and turn it into performance like, Okay, that's fine. But just because you have working definition doesn't get the clarity. Here's 1 of the things in in. We've got management training workshops and leadership development workshops, things like that. And in my management training workshop, one of the things we get people to do is I give them a couple of minutes, and I said, write down the name, and usually it's the initials, because they're afraid of somebody sitting next to them, reading off their notes, or whatever of
(04:57):
the best boss you've ever worked for, you know who's the best boss you work for, and then and then the exercise is what made them the best.
Okay? And and we've got. We've got a whole bunch of criteria that we've come up with, or that they have come up with, you know, and over a period of time. What you find is, no matter what the group they tend to come up with very similar things in terms of what made this. You know what made the best boss the best boss, and I have a list here.
(05:23):
Things like this clear, simple communication. They were consistent, respectful, encouraging of my ideas, has a vision empowering, trusted me and provided independence, not overly emotional, patient caring advocate never is out of control. In other words, they're calm, protective of the team. They're authentic. They have time for my questions. They provided mentorship celebrates my.
(05:48):
and they said, preferably through beer. They helped me to lead to my own conclusions. They were inspiring. They considered other people's opinions, no matter who that person might be. They pushed people out of their comfort zone, they walked the talk. They had good sense of humor. They structured my role for me.
(06:12):
actually enjoyed their work. They're enthusiastic results, focused, not micromanaging, transparent, acknowledged good work. They were approachable and available, fair provided feedback, both good and bad and valued, aligned. You know, our values were aligned, and they basically just made me feel good. So you know, that was across a number of different number of different people, obviously
(06:37):
in the same workshop. Because and each time we do this workshop we get versions of this as far as that's concerned. And so it was fascinating, because that was part one of the exercise. Now
there is a part to the exercise, I said, Well, who is the worst boss?
And what made them the worst boss? So we might as well put the 2 together, and then we'll we'll look at the difference, not just like what makes the best, because we might as well contrast it. And so here's here's the a smattering of the lists that I got from people because we talked about them. We'll put them on whiteboards, and we yak it through sort of thing, but they didn't effectively use my timer skills. They were condescending. They took credit for my work, micromanaging.
(07:19):
you know, things that were inconsequential. They liked being a boss more than getting a job done. They provided no context for tasks. They encouraged internal division poor at time. Management skills didn't fully understand what my job actually was and what it was required to do, being absent or withdrawn can't be trusted to keep their word
(07:42):
indecisive or not making clear decisions, not taking a stand on things unpredictable, reactionary, not forward thinking. One person said, childish, manipulative of other people, too busy, technically incapable good results. If there were good results they did it. If it was anything was wrong, it was your fault.
Self-important, not flexible, or open to new ideas made me tacked on not really part of a team allowed unacceptable behavior. You know. One person said he, doesn't respect me, you know their outward values just don't align. And another one was. The boss was not engaged. The boss was attack on to the team, not on top of the project. Goals, unclear communication, flat out, disrespectful
(08:27):
negative language and attitude secretive, visibly stressed all the time, or doesn't trust me to try new things. So that's what the worst boss the criteria we had for the worst boss.
you know.
So it was interesting. Because you you have comments, I can see. Go ahead
Govindh Jayaraman (08:47):
No, no, I think it's really interesting.
How how
how many parallels there are right? I mean, there are almost point counterpoints for most of these things
Michael Walsh (09:03):
Yeah. Yeah. And and the thing that I found is
the best bosses see their job
and see their people differently from the worst bosses. They just see the job differently. They also see the the people differently.
You know best bosses tend to listen to their people. They focus on the strengths of the people. They focus on what might make them better, and and they actually foster their growth. They realize that you can catch more flies with honey than you can vinegar. They really are looking for ways to bolster people up and really get them working at their best things, you know, the worst ones seem to drive over people and to
(09:43):
get what they want, and or they disregard them completely, or they feel like they had to harness them and try to get them to do things as opposed to working with them.
And so it was interesting to see that you know
Govindh Jayaraman (09:55):
I also thought it was really interesting that in the best boss one of the 1st points was
clarity of communication, not just communication.
but the clarity of communication. And and then
I thought, and transparency came up a lot early on as well in that in that list of best bosses, and I find that it's not that best bosses are
(10:20):
are less demanding
than bad bosses or the worst bosses. In fact, that may not be the case at all. I think it's just simply that they're clear about what they're saying. And they are willing to be transparent about what winning really looks like. They actually know what winning looks like. They are able to communicate that with you. They're able to show you how to get there right
Michael Walsh (10:44):
Right. And and you know by contrast, the worst bosses a lot of them were just. They were uncertain, unclear, and didn't provide the direction that the people were looking for in some cases, or the support when the person had the had the direction, you know, sorted out, as far as that's concerned. So it's been interesting. And it, you know the other thing.
(11:04):
There's 2 different.
Remember, we've talked about a 20th century model based on, you know, a well-oiled machine.
And we've also talked about a 21st century model based on an intelligent ecosystem, you know, in a well-owned machine. It's there for the benefit of the owners and the people that use the machine. Whereas
(11:26):
if I'm part of a well-oiled machine, I'm actually part of that machine, so the machine may be used for the people who use it and or the owners. But I'm actually part of the machine. I'm just sort of a conduit in that machine, whereas in an ecosystem it's there for everybody who's part of that ecosystem, and the difference, as it shows up in management, is very simply the difference between prescribed power
(11:50):
in trying to get people what you want them to do.
or using power of influence which is guiding people, but but actually based on credibility of that you've earned as opposed to something that the position has given you.
You see, one person could guide me, and if I don't trust that person.
(12:10):
they might have to enforce their notion on me for me to accept it, and I don't even accept it except to their face.
so I'll do it while they're there, but if they're not there, I'm not going to be doing it, whereas, if it's power of influence, you know, somebody may still guide me, or make a suggestion or do something, but you know what I trust them, because I know they've done it. I know that they've and they actually treat me like a human being, and as a result, I've got all the time in the world for somebody that actually is interested in my growth and my development. But keep in mind that people don't care what you know
(12:44):
until they feel understood by you.
So if if I feel understood and I feel like you see me and hear me. Then I have all the time in the world for what you share with me, because I know you understand me.
whereas if I don't get that, you understand me, you're just sort of doing something for the company that I have to become part of. That's when I really do feel like a cog in the system, and I'm in a situation where either I go begrudgingly, or even if I go as a good soldier, you don't have my brain at the table. All you've got is my willingness to follow an order.
(13:16):
and that puts a lot of pressure on the manager. Frankly, it's actually harder to be a manager if you don't get the people's, and I won't say get their buy-in like it's this thing to get. But if people don't want to work with you.
it's really hard, you know, you know. So so it's interesting. When you see
Govindh Jayaraman (13:34):
Let's back up a little bit, though, on the credibility they've earned. And this idea of influence, because I think those are.
you know, the power of influence, and good leaders influence their teams as opposed to command and control them, is is clear. But the the question is.
how do they influence their teams. And and I think that there are formulas for this. And and it starts off
(13:59):
quite interestingly, quite, quite interesting interestingly, with being interested in the person interested in what they're doing, interested in their perspective? Right? Doesn't it start off with curiosity as opposed to anything else?
Michael Walsh (14:15):
So does curiosity play a large factor? Sure, I totally agree.
If if I if okay, so
do you want me to point out the trap you're heading towards
Govindh Jayaraman (14:30):
Sure, sure, because
Michael Walsh (14:31):
You're heading towards the trap, because here's what you're trying to do is you're trying to identify what are the criteria on that. And I, and I'm saying that place will get you in trouble. So I have an alternative that that
Govindh Jayaraman (14:41):
Sure.
Michael Walsh (14:41):
Actually keeps you out of trouble. Okay, so 1st of all, what I would say is, context, gives you
a whole different perspective on content.
So if I were to ask you, What is your favorite fruit?
Okay? Or I just say, what's the best fruit? What would you say
Govindh Jayaraman (15:02):
Apples.
Michael Walsh (15:03):
Okay, do you know, if I ask 10 people, I get 8 answers
Govindh Jayaraman (15:07):
Probably you might get 12
Michael Walsh (15:09):
Go ahead.
apples or oranges, and it's all about apples and oranges, whereas if I said, What's the best fruit for vitamin C, what would you say
Govindh Jayaraman (15:20):
Lemons.
Michael Walsh (15:21):
Okay. So 8 out of 10 would say some sort of citrus, and 7 of those 8 would say oranges
Govindh Jayaraman (15:28):
Yes.
Michael Walsh (15:29):
What's the best fruit? If you're going running
Govindh Jayaraman (15:33):
None.
Michael Walsh (15:35):
None more than 2 out of 10
Govindh Jayaraman (15:40):
Ha-ha!
Michael Walsh (15:40):
8 out of 10 are gonna say, banana.
Govindh Jayaraman (15:42):
Yes.
okay. But what you find is that is the context. You see, if I don't say what for? What's the best route best room for what
Michael Walsh (15:50):
For what?
So so if I, the problem is, is, what are the you know? What's the formula? Well, the problem is the formula is this thing? It depends on the perspective. What if what you did was you said, you know what here's the perspective to look from.
If I'm a manager, okay.
Govindh Jayaraman (16:08):
Yeah, and that. And that's why I said curiosity. So here, here's where
Michael Walsh (16:11):
I understand that. So that's that's why I didn't say you were already in the trap. I agree with you
Govindh Jayaraman (16:16):
So because I was at connection so connection before context before content.
So
Michael Walsh (16:22):
Connection sounds like it to do for me
Govindh Jayaraman (16:25):
It's a what
Michael Walsh (16:26):
To do.
Govindh Jayaraman (16:28):
Well, no, meaning that as a as a manager, I think the 1st thing that we we can't
challenge anybody. We can't do anything with anybody
period unless we're connected to them.
and the only way to be connected to them is actually to be interested in them.
And that goes back to your growth plan right? Like, if it goes back to
(16:49):
creating a career development plan
and being interested in them and being interested in them, provides a lot of room
for a lot of other things
Michael Walsh (16:58):
Okay. So now we're in the context, this is perfect. So so that, yeah, that's where I'd go is I'd say, You know what, unless you care about their win. None of the rest of it matters if I care
Govindh Jayaraman (17:06):
Exactly.
Michael Walsh (17:06):
I don't have to. I don't actually worry about what I say, what I do, and if I'm interested in what would actually have them maximize their own success in career development. If I actually take an honest interest in that rather than using a formula, what I do is I go. You know what? I don't know what the formula is. It's going to be different for different people. You have more than one child. Do you raise them the same.
(17:27):
The short, of course, picture. The answer is yes, the small answer is absolutely
Govindh Jayaraman (17:32):
Absolutely not
Michael Walsh (17:33):
It's like what what impacts one. That same strategy will not work for the next one. Right?
Govindh Jayaraman (17:38):
And the 1st kid was the 1st kid. There were no other kids around. Then all of a sudden the second one came along, and there were 2 kids. Then the 3rd one came along, and you know then there were 3, so they can't possibly have the same dynamic
Michael Walsh (17:49):
And do you know that
Govindh Jayaraman (17:50):
As much as we'd like to
Michael Walsh (17:51):
That's also true, even if you have twins.
Yeah, but there's 7 min between them.
It's still true. It's still true, and you know you might have a little bit more in common. But but it's interesting to see. So so if you actually take an interest to see if somebody isn't interested in the growth of their people.
Keep them away from management.
(18:13):
And this is one of the mistakes people make when they're growing their business, and a lot of people say, well, you know, if I want to maximize my personal earnings, I have to go into management, because that's what will help me best feed my family, and if the best revenue comes from being a manager, then that means everybody's going to steer for it. Whether or not they're they're really, you know, inclined for that if somebody else is really better as a specialist. But they're not very good as a
(18:38):
manager. They'll still go to management, because that's what gives them maximum paycheck. Whereas if I make a specialist as I'm growing, if I make a specialist, just as if not more rewarding for the person who really brings something unique themselves to the table, as I would pay in terms of compensation, and all that stuff for a manager like I really have to treat them as 2 separate career paths, and if I treat them as 2 separate career paths, I'm
(19:01):
in good shape. If I don't, then I'm going to get people gearing towards management for the money, because that's what gives them the maximum money. Now that said the context or perspective, I look at with regards to management is if you really care about the growth of your people. And you also understand that I'm 1 person. If I have 6 people working with me.
Okay, if I do my job halfway decent, the 6 will always outperform the one. Even if the one person can do 2 or 3 people's works. They can't do 6 people's jobs, and if they can, you're hiring wrong. People
Govindh Jayaraman (19:34):
Absolutely.
And and and I think that you know to your point, isn't it, that we on a senior leadership level often just get
how we measure bosses wrong, too, because we're not looking at this idea of growing our people. We're looking at finishing the project and the project. It's all project related metrics, and there are very few
(20:02):
people-related metrics
Michael Walsh (20:04):
Now, that doesn't mean sit around in a circle and sing Kumbaya with somebody playing the guitar, and we got a pointy hit
Govindh Jayaraman (20:09):
No way, no way.
Michael Walsh (20:10):
What it, what it does mean. Well, here's the thing
Govindh Jayaraman (20:13):
And it certainly doesn't mean pizza carts on the every every day. Right? I mean, we're not talking about
Michael Walsh (20:18):
So you can actually be very strategic about this. But here's the other side of it. We're actually lousy
at measuring our effectiveness as a boss
Govindh Jayaraman (20:28):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (20:29):
So. So I've got some. I've got a gallup stat for you. Gallup's done so many different stats, I mean they they originally their original employee. Engagement surveys were with a million employees and 80,000 managers, and then they did a part, 2 on that, and that was longitudinal studies. I think it was between 77, and 91 or something, and then they came up with their book, break 1st break all the rules in. I believe it was 92, or 93,
(20:52):
but then they continued on with their studies, and they grew it to over 2 million employees and over 150,000 managers.
and one of the things they found was that people just don't know if they're any good, they said about 10% of managers are great managers, but only 10%.
However, they, when surveyed, 71% of all managers placed themselves in the top. 20% of all managers
Govindh Jayaraman (21:16):
71%
Michael Walsh (21:17):
71% place themselves in the top 20%. In other words, nobody knows. They think, well, you know I care. So I'm so, so I must be a good manager, because I know
Govindh Jayaraman (21:26):
Putting in 80 HA week
Michael Walsh (21:27):
And I know how to speak to people, and I know I understand the job. I you know, and we get the projects across the line. So I must be a great manager. I don't know if I'm top 10%, but I'm certainly top 20. So so it's fascinating to see that.
And the truth is, we have no idea
Govindh Jayaraman (21:42):
- so how do we measure it?
Michael Walsh (21:47):
That's a great conversation for an upcoming paper napkin coming to you
Govindh Jayaraman (21:52):
Right?
So
so, okay, before we get into the, how do we measure it? Yeah. And and all of those things, let's finish this thought.
Do bad bosses know they're bad.
do good bosses know they're good
Michael Walsh (22:08):
Well, it's interesting because most bad bosses don't know they're bad.
They don't actually realize they're as bad as they are.
Okay. And I cause I've been in in like, I've been in groups with 40 managers. I'm I'm training at the same time it would be anywhere from 10 to 40 depends on. I actually the highest number, I think, was about 68 or 70 managers, because we we put a few companies together in the same system. And
(22:34):
They started reading what they themselves had said
about good bosses and bad bosses, and half of them in the room. They're like, Oh, my God, I do some of these things in the bad boss list, and they're mortified thinking maybe I'm a horrible manager after all, and you know it was fat. I said, don't worry about it. We'll teach you this skills so you can get past that. And it's like it was like a little bit of a crisis moment that happens sometimes
Govindh Jayaraman (22:57):
Yeah, yeah.
Michael Walsh (22:57):
Right? Because they don't realize, you know, they well, yeah, there's that. And then, well.
wow! And people are calling this their worst boss. So it was fascinating to see invariably the minute you have over 20 people in the same room looking at that, you'll have at least one who wants to quit.
Yeah, I'm not talking to the program they want to quit management they're like, don't worry. All is not lost. There's different ways of looking at this, because the truth is, people just aren't trained in it. We assume that because we're good with people, we know how to manage.
(23:28):
Well, okay. So Wayne Gretzky, one of the best hockey players all time ever, I mean, I've never seen him below number 3 on anybody's list.
Okay?
He couldn't coach himself out of a paper bag, I mean he got fired inside of 2 years with Phoenix coyotes when he was a coach there. You know he had such a strong intuitive skill that didn't translate into into his coaching ability. Whereas when you had Larry Robinson and Jacques Lemaire, 2 defensemen from the Montreal Canadiens, who actually ended up being coaches, together with the New Jersey devils in the I believe it was in the eighties. They
(24:07):
they were brilliant coaches.
you know, but they had. They had conscious thought of what they were doing, and because they didn't have just the intuition that that Gretzky had developed. And so, while Gretzky knew for himself. He didn't know how to. He didn't know how to impart it or teach it, or support others to have it, whereas Robinson and Le Mare. They did so. It's interesting
Govindh Jayaraman (24:26):
There's also the argument that defenders are smarter than offense.
Michael Walsh (24:31):
And that's an argument for people that are in a that are way above my pay grade. I'm just
Govindh Jayaraman (24:38):
Okay. So so
I think this is fascinating. Is there anything else we need to do about this napkin before we get into the next conversation. When we talk about
Part 2, on how we actually do this
Michael Walsh (24:53):
Well, the the one thing that I would say to complete this thing that we can also use to start the next one is that
managers were trained in the 20th century mindset and fundamentally wallet.
Some would argue it didn't even work very well for products, but it clearly doesn't work in a service based. You know, infrastructure, or whatever 78% of all business in North America right now is service-based business.
(25:22):
And you know if in a product based business, no matter how complicated the algorithm, the inputs are the same and the outcomes are the same, then I can actually break that down and parse it out to people, and that and the management. I'm the boss. You're the employee you need to listen to me is because I could actually give you fixed things to do in a service based environment. You need their brain at the table, and the bosses no longer have, like all the power as far as that's concerned. So the 20th century
(25:48):
mentality of, you know, assembly line thinking, and everybody has to do their specific. It just doesn't apply anymore. And people don't realize it. And because it's been around since the early 19 hundreds, the start of the 20th century.
we think that's all there ever was, and all there ever will be. Well, it's just not accurate. And so that's fundamentally one spot where people get stuck. So that would be the the last thing I'd say about that
Govindh Jayaraman (26:13):
All right, thanks, Michael.
Michael Walsh (26:15):
You're welcome.
Michael Walsh. Welcome back to paper napkin wisdom. I'm excited to continue the series with you today.
Michael Walsh (00:09):
Excellent.
Govindh Jayaraman (00:10):
All right. So we've been talking about
teams a lot we've been talking about, you know, training and growing your people
understanding. And I think this fundamental thing is the core of your company used to be perceived as generating profit and generating customer value. We've added this 3rd dimension around professional growth. But the team have to be part of the results in order that to exist. And we talked about a number of things that related to that. And after talking about teams, we started talking about this idea of managers, and we just sort of touched on that last episode. And we're getting into growing your managers, because
(00:47):
teams need managers. Teams need leadership.
And today's napkin is about growing your managers. And it says, grow managers. Best boss
dash worst bosh. And here's the the best part. Do bad bosses know they're bad.
and that's a great question. So kick us off there. Why did you share this one with me?
Michael Walsh (01:08):
Well, because there's a few things right, because, 1st of all, there's this whole conundrum around management.
The truth is that being a middle manager is probably the toughest job in any company.
I mean, quite often people have multiple bosses, multiple employees and nobody listens. They're expected to do a whole bunch of things. And and you know they figure well, you know your job, you know, you know your people. So just handle it.
(01:36):
And so people actually are not trained for management yet they're expected to perform, and it has such a huge impact on everything that happens in a company, especially a service-based company that's driven by the expertise of their people. That is your deliverable. And so
Govindh Jayaraman (01:53):
Like the reason why managers at this middle level become managers is usually because they're really good at doing the job.
It's not that they're really good at being managers. It's just they're really good at being in the job. So they think because you're so good at being in the job. We'll just make you in charge of a bunch of people who are doing this work
Michael Walsh (02:14):
And from one perspective it makes sense because it's like, Well, I trust this person to get the job done so with themselves. Then they're probably the one I would trust most to work with my team to get the results, because I do have that level of trust and confidence in them.
and it's misplaced
Govindh Jayaraman (02:34):
Yeah. And and not only is it misplaced, but I
going backward, we're not training them for the results we want, because the results are different when you're in that role
Michael Walsh (02:46):
Well, well, in fact, that's exactly why it's misplaced. You're absolutely right.
Govindh Jayaraman (02:49):
Good.
Michael Walsh (02:50):
Here's the thing. The skills it takes to deliver a result are very different from the skills it takes to support somebody else, to generate the result. And so, and
the chasm between 20th century
business operations and 21st century business operations is probably the widest here. This is the place. It shows up the most. So when we talked earlier about the difference between a well-oiled machine and an intelligent ecosystem where it, where it lands, is smack dab in the middle of the lap of the person who's in management
Govindh Jayaraman (03:26):
Right right now.
I I think I think that there's so. So what goes into being
a best boss? Let's let's start aspirationally right. What should
Michael Walsh (03:39):
Well, I actually, I know
Govindh Jayaraman (03:41):
You're gonna go the other way.
Michael Walsh (03:43):
No, I'm not gonna go the other way. I'm gonna take a step back and add.
Okay, so the 1st thing I'd like to say is is.
let's define management because people don't know what management is. So I have a definition that I actually use in the book. It's to take talents of people and turn them into performance. Basically.
So to take the talented people and turn it into performance. There's a lot of different people have done definitions, and I believe that one I got from Marcus Buckingham. Of course Buckingham was one of the lead people at the Gallup organization. When they were doing all their employment engagement things. And then he's since opened his own internationally renowned research company and everything he does is based on not anecdotal information, but empirical data.
(04:28):
So so what he's done. And he's saying, Listen, if you define managers as people who take talents of people and turn it into performance like, Okay, that's fine. But just because you have working definition doesn't get the clarity. Here's 1 of the things in in. We've got management training workshops and leadership development workshops, things like that. And in my management training workshop, one of the things we get people to do is I give them a couple of minutes, and I said, write down the name, and usually it's the initials, because they're afraid of somebody sitting next to them, reading off their notes, or whatever of
(04:57):
the best boss you've ever worked for, you know who's the best boss you work for, and then and then the exercise is what made them the best.
Okay? And and we've got. We've got a whole bunch of criteria that we've come up with, or that they have come up with, you know, and over a period of time. What you find is, no matter what the group they tend to come up with very similar things in terms of what made this. You know what made the best boss the best boss, and I have a list here.
(05:23):
Things like this clear, simple communication. They were consistent, respectful, encouraging of my ideas, has a vision empowering, trusted me and provided independence, not overly emotional, patient caring advocate never is out of control. In other words, they're calm, protective of the team. They're authentic. They have time for my questions. They provided mentorship celebrates my.
(05:48):
and they said, preferably through beer. They helped me to lead to my own conclusions. They were inspiring. They considered other people's opinions, no matter who that person might be. They pushed people out of their comfort zone, they walked the talk. They had good sense of humor. They structured my role for me.
(06:12):
actually enjoyed their work. They're enthusiastic results, focused, not micromanaging, transparent, acknowledged good work. They were approachable and available, fair provided feedback, both good and bad and valued, aligned. You know, our values were aligned, and they basically just made me feel good. So you know, that was across a number of different number of different people, obviously
(06:37):
in the same workshop. Because and each time we do this workshop we get versions of this as far as that's concerned. And so it was fascinating, because that was part one of the exercise. Now
there is a part to the exercise, I said, Well, who is the worst boss?
And what made them the worst boss? So we might as well put the 2 together, and then we'll we'll look at the difference, not just like what makes the best, because we might as well contrast it. And so here's here's the a smattering of the lists that I got from people because we talked about them. We'll put them on whiteboards, and we yak it through sort of thing, but they didn't effectively use my timer skills. They were condescending. They took credit for my work, micromanaging.
(07:19):
you know, things that were inconsequential. They liked being a boss more than getting a job done. They provided no context for tasks. They encouraged internal division poor at time. Management skills didn't fully understand what my job actually was and what it was required to do, being absent or withdrawn can't be trusted to keep their word
(07:42):
indecisive or not making clear decisions, not taking a stand on things unpredictable, reactionary, not forward thinking. One person said, childish, manipulative of other people, too busy, technically incapable good results. If there were good results they did it. If it was anything was wrong, it was your fault.
Self-important, not flexible, or open to new ideas made me tacked on not really part of a team allowed unacceptable behavior. You know. One person said he, doesn't respect me, you know their outward values just don't align. And another one was. The boss was not engaged. The boss was attack on to the team, not on top of the project. Goals, unclear communication, flat out, disrespectful
(08:27):
negative language and attitude secretive, visibly stressed all the time, or doesn't trust me to try new things. So that's what the worst boss the criteria we had for the worst boss.
you know.
So it was interesting. Because you you have comments, I can see. Go ahead
Govindh Jayaraman (08:47):
No, no, I think it's really interesting.
How how
how many parallels there are right? I mean, there are almost point counterpoints for most of these things
Michael Walsh (09:03):
Yeah. Yeah. And and the thing that I found is
the best bosses see their job
and see their people differently from the worst bosses. They just see the job differently. They also see the the people differently.
You know best bosses tend to listen to their people. They focus on the strengths of the people. They focus on what might make them better, and and they actually foster their growth. They realize that you can catch more flies with honey than you can vinegar. They really are looking for ways to bolster people up and really get them working at their best things, you know, the worst ones seem to drive over people and to
(09:43):
get what they want, and or they disregard them completely, or they feel like they had to harness them and try to get them to do things as opposed to working with them.
And so it was interesting to see that you know
Govindh Jayaraman (09:55):
I also thought it was really interesting that in the best boss one of the 1st points was
clarity of communication, not just communication.
but the clarity of communication. And and then
I thought, and transparency came up a lot early on as well in that in that list of best bosses, and I find that it's not that best bosses are
(10:20):
are less demanding
than bad bosses or the worst bosses. In fact, that may not be the case at all. I think it's just simply that they're clear about what they're saying. And they are willing to be transparent about what winning really looks like. They actually know what winning looks like. They are able to communicate that with you. They're able to show you how to get there right
Michael Walsh (10:44):
Right. And and you know by contrast, the worst bosses a lot of them were just. They were uncertain, unclear, and didn't provide the direction that the people were looking for in some cases, or the support when the person had the had the direction, you know, sorted out, as far as that's concerned. So it's been interesting. And it, you know the other thing.
(11:04):
There's 2 different.
Remember, we've talked about a 20th century model based on, you know, a well-oiled machine.
And we've also talked about a 21st century model based on an intelligent ecosystem, you know, in a well-owned machine. It's there for the benefit of the owners and the people that use the machine. Whereas
(11:26):
if I'm part of a well-oiled machine, I'm actually part of that machine, so the machine may be used for the people who use it and or the owners. But I'm actually part of the machine. I'm just sort of a conduit in that machine, whereas in an ecosystem it's there for everybody who's part of that ecosystem, and the difference, as it shows up in management, is very simply the difference between prescribed power
(11:50):
in trying to get people what you want them to do.
or using power of influence which is guiding people, but but actually based on credibility of that you've earned as opposed to something that the position has given you.
You see, one person could guide me, and if I don't trust that person.
(12:10):
they might have to enforce their notion on me for me to accept it, and I don't even accept it except to their face.
so I'll do it while they're there, but if they're not there, I'm not going to be doing it, whereas, if it's power of influence, you know, somebody may still guide me, or make a suggestion or do something, but you know what I trust them, because I know they've done it. I know that they've and they actually treat me like a human being, and as a result, I've got all the time in the world for somebody that actually is interested in my growth and my development. But keep in mind that people don't care what you know
(12:44):
until they feel understood by you.
So if if I feel understood and I feel like you see me and hear me. Then I have all the time in the world for what you share with me, because I know you understand me.
whereas if I don't get that, you understand me, you're just sort of doing something for the company that I have to become part of. That's when I really do feel like a cog in the system, and I'm in a situation where either I go begrudgingly, or even if I go as a good soldier, you don't have my brain at the table. All you've got is my willingness to follow an order.
(13:16):
and that puts a lot of pressure on the manager. Frankly, it's actually harder to be a manager if you don't get the people's, and I won't say get their buy-in like it's this thing to get. But if people don't want to work with you.
it's really hard, you know, you know. So so it's interesting. When you see
Govindh Jayaraman (13:34):
Let's back up a little bit, though, on the credibility they've earned. And this idea of influence, because I think those are.
you know, the power of influence, and good leaders influence their teams as opposed to command and control them, is is clear. But the the question is.
how do they influence their teams. And and I think that there are formulas for this. And and it starts off
(13:59):
quite interestingly, quite, quite interesting interestingly, with being interested in the person interested in what they're doing, interested in their perspective? Right? Doesn't it start off with curiosity as opposed to anything else?
Michael Walsh (14:15):
So does curiosity play a large factor? Sure, I totally agree.
If if I if okay, so
do you want me to point out the trap you're heading towards
Govindh Jayaraman (14:30):
Sure, sure, because
Michael Walsh (14:31):
You're heading towards the trap, because here's what you're trying to do is you're trying to identify what are the criteria on that. And I, and I'm saying that place will get you in trouble. So I have an alternative that that
Govindh Jayaraman (14:41):
Sure.
Michael Walsh (14:41):
Actually keeps you out of trouble. Okay, so 1st of all, what I would say is, context, gives you
a whole different perspective on content.
So if I were to ask you, What is your favorite fruit?
Okay? Or I just say, what's the best fruit? What would you say
Govindh Jayaraman (15:02):
Apples.
Michael Walsh (15:03):
Okay, do you know, if I ask 10 people, I get 8 answers
Govindh Jayaraman (15:07):
Probably you might get 12
Michael Walsh (15:09):
Go ahead.
apples or oranges, and it's all about apples and oranges, whereas if I said, What's the best fruit for vitamin C, what would you say
Govindh Jayaraman (15:20):
Lemons.
Michael Walsh (15:21):
Okay. So 8 out of 10 would say some sort of citrus, and 7 of those 8 would say oranges
Govindh Jayaraman (15:28):
Yes.
Michael Walsh (15:29):
What's the best fruit? If you're going running
Govindh Jayaraman (15:33):
None.
Michael Walsh (15:35):
None more than 2 out of 10
Govindh Jayaraman (15:40):
Ha-ha!
Michael Walsh (15:40):
8 out of 10 are gonna say, banana.
Govindh Jayaraman (15:42):
Yes.
okay. But what you find is that is the context. You see, if I don't say what for? What's the best route best room for what
Michael Walsh (15:50):
For what?
So so if I, the problem is, is, what are the you know? What's the formula? Well, the problem is the formula is this thing? It depends on the perspective. What if what you did was you said, you know what here's the perspective to look from.
If I'm a manager, okay.
Govindh Jayaraman (16:08):
Yeah, and that. And that's why I said curiosity. So here, here's where
Michael Walsh (16:11):
I understand that. So that's that's why I didn't say you were already in the trap. I agree with you
Govindh Jayaraman (16:16):
So because I was at connection so connection before context before content.
So
Michael Walsh (16:22):
Connection sounds like it to do for me
Govindh Jayaraman (16:25):
It's a what
Michael Walsh (16:26):
To do.
Govindh Jayaraman (16:28):
Well, no, meaning that as a as a manager, I think the 1st thing that we we can't
challenge anybody. We can't do anything with anybody
period unless we're connected to them.
and the only way to be connected to them is actually to be interested in them.
And that goes back to your growth plan right? Like, if it goes back to
(16:49):
creating a career development plan
and being interested in them and being interested in them, provides a lot of room
for a lot of other things
Michael Walsh (16:58):
Okay. So now we're in the context, this is perfect. So so that, yeah, that's where I'd go is I'd say, You know what, unless you care about their win. None of the rest of it matters if I care
Govindh Jayaraman (17:06):
Exactly.
Michael Walsh (17:06):
I don't have to. I don't actually worry about what I say, what I do, and if I'm interested in what would actually have them maximize their own success in career development. If I actually take an honest interest in that rather than using a formula, what I do is I go. You know what? I don't know what the formula is. It's going to be different for different people. You have more than one child. Do you raise them the same.
(17:27):
The short, of course, picture. The answer is yes, the small answer is absolutely
Govindh Jayaraman (17:32):
Absolutely not
Michael Walsh (17:33):
It's like what what impacts one. That same strategy will not work for the next one. Right?
Govindh Jayaraman (17:38):
And the 1st kid was the 1st kid. There were no other kids around. Then all of a sudden the second one came along, and there were 2 kids. Then the 3rd one came along, and you know then there were 3, so they can't possibly have the same dynamic
Michael Walsh (17:49):
And do you know that
Govindh Jayaraman (17:50):
As much as we'd like to
Michael Walsh (17:51):
That's also true, even if you have twins.
Yeah, but there's 7 min between them.
It's still true. It's still true, and you know you might have a little bit more in common. But but it's interesting to see. So so if you actually take an interest to see if somebody isn't interested in the growth of their people.
Keep them away from management.
(18:13):
And this is one of the mistakes people make when they're growing their business, and a lot of people say, well, you know, if I want to maximize my personal earnings, I have to go into management, because that's what will help me best feed my family, and if the best revenue comes from being a manager, then that means everybody's going to steer for it. Whether or not they're they're really, you know, inclined for that if somebody else is really better as a specialist. But they're not very good as a
(18:38):
manager. They'll still go to management, because that's what gives them maximum paycheck. Whereas if I make a specialist as I'm growing, if I make a specialist, just as if not more rewarding for the person who really brings something unique themselves to the table, as I would pay in terms of compensation, and all that stuff for a manager like I really have to treat them as 2 separate career paths, and if I treat them as 2 separate career paths, I'm
(19:01):
in good shape. If I don't, then I'm going to get people gearing towards management for the money, because that's what gives them the maximum money. Now that said the context or perspective, I look at with regards to management is if you really care about the growth of your people. And you also understand that I'm 1 person. If I have 6 people working with me.
Okay, if I do my job halfway decent, the 6 will always outperform the one. Even if the one person can do 2 or 3 people's works. They can't do 6 people's jobs, and if they can, you're hiring wrong. People
Govindh Jayaraman (19:34):
Absolutely.
And and and I think that you know to your point, isn't it, that we on a senior leadership level often just get
how we measure bosses wrong, too, because we're not looking at this idea of growing our people. We're looking at finishing the project and the project. It's all project related metrics, and there are very few
(20:02):
people-related metrics
Michael Walsh (20:04):
Now, that doesn't mean sit around in a circle and sing Kumbaya with somebody playing the guitar, and we got a pointy hit
Govindh Jayaraman (20:09):
No way, no way.
Michael Walsh (20:10):
What it, what it does mean. Well, here's the thing
Govindh Jayaraman (20:13):
And it certainly doesn't mean pizza carts on the every every day. Right? I mean, we're not talking about
Michael Walsh (20:18):
So you can actually be very strategic about this. But here's the other side of it. We're actually lousy
at measuring our effectiveness as a boss
Govindh Jayaraman (20:28):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (20:29):
So. So I've got some. I've got a gallup stat for you. Gallup's done so many different stats, I mean they they originally their original employee. Engagement surveys were with a million employees and 80,000 managers, and then they did a part, 2 on that, and that was longitudinal studies. I think it was between 77, and 91 or something, and then they came up with their book, break 1st break all the rules in. I believe it was 92, or 93,
(20:52):
but then they continued on with their studies, and they grew it to over 2 million employees and over 150,000 managers.
and one of the things they found was that people just don't know if they're any good, they said about 10% of managers are great managers, but only 10%.
However, they, when surveyed, 71% of all managers placed themselves in the top. 20% of all managers
Govindh Jayaraman (21:16):
71%
Michael Walsh (21:17):
71% place themselves in the top 20%. In other words, nobody knows. They think, well, you know I care. So I'm so, so I must be a good manager, because I know
Govindh Jayaraman (21:26):
Putting in 80 HA week
Michael Walsh (21:27):
And I know how to speak to people, and I know I understand the job. I you know, and we get the projects across the line. So I must be a great manager. I don't know if I'm top 10%, but I'm certainly top 20. So so it's fascinating to see that.
And the truth is, we have no idea
Govindh Jayaraman (21:42):
- so how do we measure it?
Michael Walsh (21:47):
That's a great conversation for an upcoming paper napkin coming to you
Govindh Jayaraman (21:52):
Right?
So
so, okay, before we get into the, how do we measure it? Yeah. And and all of those things, let's finish this thought.
Do bad bosses know they're bad.
do good bosses know they're good
Michael Walsh (22:08):
Well, it's interesting because most bad bosses don't know they're bad.
They don't actually realize they're as bad as they are.
Okay. And I cause I've been in in like, I've been in groups with 40 managers. I'm I'm training at the same time it would be anywhere from 10 to 40 depends on. I actually the highest number, I think, was about 68 or 70 managers, because we we put a few companies together in the same system. And
(22:34):
They started reading what they themselves had said
about good bosses and bad bosses, and half of them in the room. They're like, Oh, my God, I do some of these things in the bad boss list, and they're mortified thinking maybe I'm a horrible manager after all, and you know it was fat. I said, don't worry about it. We'll teach you this skills so you can get past that. And it's like it was like a little bit of a crisis moment that happens sometimes
Govindh Jayaraman (22:57):
Yeah, yeah.
Michael Walsh (22:57):
Right? Because they don't realize, you know, they well, yeah, there's that. And then, well.
wow! And people are calling this their worst boss. So it was fascinating to see invariably the minute you have over 20 people in the same room looking at that, you'll have at least one who wants to quit.
Yeah, I'm not talking to the program they want to quit management they're like, don't worry. All is not lost. There's different ways of looking at this, because the truth is, people just aren't trained in it. We assume that because we're good with people, we know how to manage.
(23:28):
Well, okay. So Wayne Gretzky, one of the best hockey players all time ever, I mean, I've never seen him below number 3 on anybody's list.
Okay?
He couldn't coach himself out of a paper bag, I mean he got fired inside of 2 years with Phoenix coyotes when he was a coach there. You know he had such a strong intuitive skill that didn't translate into into his coaching ability. Whereas when you had Larry Robinson and Jacques Lemaire, 2 defensemen from the Montreal Canadiens, who actually ended up being coaches, together with the New Jersey devils in the I believe it was in the eighties. They
(24:07):
they were brilliant coaches.
you know, but they had. They had conscious thought of what they were doing, and because they didn't have just the intuition that that Gretzky had developed. And so, while Gretzky knew for himself. He didn't know how to. He didn't know how to impart it or teach it, or support others to have it, whereas Robinson and Le Mare. They did so. It's interesting
Govindh Jayaraman (24:26):
There's also the argument that defenders are smarter than offense.
Michael Walsh (24:31):
And that's an argument for people that are in a that are way above my pay grade. I'm just
Govindh Jayaraman (24:38):
Okay. So so
I think this is fascinating. Is there anything else we need to do about this napkin before we get into the next conversation. When we talk about
Part 2, on how we actually do this
Michael Walsh (24:53):
Well, the the one thing that I would say to complete this thing that we can also use to start the next one is that
managers were trained in the 20th century mindset and fundamentally wallet.
Some would argue it didn't even work very well for products, but it clearly doesn't work in a service based. You know, infrastructure, or whatever 78% of all business in North America right now is service-based business.
(25:22):
And you know if in a product based business, no matter how complicated the algorithm, the inputs are the same and the outcomes are the same, then I can actually break that down and parse it out to people, and that and the management. I'm the boss. You're the employee you need to listen to me is because I could actually give you fixed things to do in a service based environment. You need their brain at the table, and the bosses no longer have, like all the power as far as that's concerned. So the 20th century
(25:48):
mentality of, you know, assembly line thinking, and everybody has to do their specific. It just doesn't apply anymore. And people don't realize it. And because it's been around since the early 19 hundreds, the start of the 20th century.
we think that's all there ever was, and all there ever will be. Well, it's just not accurate. And so that's fundamentally one spot where people get stuck. So that would be the the last thing I'd say about that
Govindh Jayaraman (26:13):
All right, thanks, Michael.
Michael Walsh (26:15):
You're welcome.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.