On today’s napkin, Michael sketches a deceptively simple truth: a manager who works through people generates far bigger results than a talented individual contributor working alone. The drawing shows two paths: Manager → People → (big) Results versus Individual → (smaller) Results. It’s not a knock on personal excellence; it’s a reminder that leadership scale lives in leverage—the kind you earn by growing your people.
Early in our conversation, Michael laughed about how many of us misread our own management ability: “According to Gallup, 71% of all managers put themselves in the top 20% of all managers.” That gap between confidence and capability is exactly why this napkin matters—most businesses hit a ceiling right where frontline heroes are promoted and suddenly responsible for everyone else’s outcomes.
So why is the shift so hard? Because the skills that make you great as an individual contributor aren’t the same skills that make you a great manager. As Michael puts it, “what it takes as an individual contributor are vastly different from the skills that it takes to be a manager.” If you were promoted for being the best “doer,” your default under pressure is to jump back into the work. That gets you short-term relief—and long-term stagnation.
Michael also challenges an old industrial-age myth: “run your business like a well-oiled machine.” The problem with that metaphor? “People become cogs in a system.” Cogs don’t think, learn, or grow. People do. The pre-industrial apprenticeship model understood this: masters taught, journeymen practiced, and capability scaled as individuals grew. Returning to that spirit—teach, develop, and transfer skill—is the modern manager’s edge.
We also got into the most abused word in management: accountability. Michael’s take is clarifying: “You’re now accountable for everybody’s result. Not just yours.” But that doesn’t mean “hold people” in the punitive sense. The job is to partner in accountability: “What if I treat you as somebody who’s accountable, and I partner with you in your accountability?” That shift—from policing to partnering—unlocks adult-to-adult ownership without the control games that kill trust.
Another gem: managers who expect people to succeed their way will always leave performance on the table. “There are 7.9 billion iterations of the world,” Michael quips. Translation: personalize how you support each person. Some learn by watching, others by trying. Some need space; others need cadence. Your job isn’t to clone yourself; it’s to discover how each person wins, then build the environment for that win to happen repeatedly.
Here’s the kicker: when managers spend their energy growing people and shaping systems, results compound. When they spend their energy doing the work themselves, results plateau. The napkin makes the asymmetry obvious. Your growth ceiling is the number of tasks you can personally touch. Your company’s growth ceiling is the number of capable people you can empower and align.
Michael’s Napkin in One Line: Managers don’t scale by doing more; they scale by making more people capable of producing results.
About Michael: Michael Walsh is the founder of the Walsh Business Growth Institute and a multi-time author. His work focuses on helping established, service-based companies grow profitably while giving owners more freedom. His latest thinking is captured in Freedom by Design: The Established Business Owner’s Guide to Grow, Make an Impact, and Find the Joy Again.
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, the series continues, and we had a spirited conversation about good bosses and bad bosses. In our last
conversation in our last napkin. And you know what I thought was really number. Like a crazy. You shared some numbers around
the percentages of how many people think that they're either good or bad, or in this case how many people thought they were good? They were striking! What were those numbers? Again?
Michael Walsh (00:32):
71%. According to Gallup, 71% of all managers put themselves in the top 20% of all managers.
And Gallup further says that only about 10% of all managers are actually good at their job. They're like really great at their job. So so
if 10% of all managers are great, and 71% of all people who are in management put themselves in the top 20% of all managers.
(00:57):
clearly, there's some disconnects. Let's just say that
Govindh Jayaraman (01:00):
Yeah. So people just don't know whether or not they're good or not. And most people
well are just not as good as they think they are.
Michael Walsh (01:08):
Well. And the thing is that they've been trained in management through osmosis based on the 20th century model. 20th century model. Basically said, run your business.
Excuse me like a well-oiled machine, and as a result, you know, people become cogs in a system
Govindh Jayaraman (01:23):
Yeah. And I think that the word itself is a little broken right? This idea that you're managing people is say, just is to say that you're controlling them in some way, and that's not really what makes
for a great team
Michael Walsh (01:39):
Well, it I don't know. Nobody wants to be controlled
Govindh Jayaraman (01:43):
Right, but but the word itself suggests that so
Michael Walsh (01:46):
Word itself totally suggests that
Govindh Jayaraman (01:48):
So how do we? How do we break free of the mold and grow our managers
Michael Walsh (01:54):
Well.
here's the thing. So so let's take a step back
Govindh Jayaraman (02:04):
Shocking that you'd want to take a step back
Michael Walsh (02:06):
Only on dates that end. And why?
Because here's the, you know. If you remember, how do people get to where they're at? Okay, they excelled as an individual contributor, and the boss said, I trust this person more than others, and as a result, I'm going to make this person the manager, because if I trust them as an individual contributor, hence I should be able to trust them as a manager, or I trust them most as a manager, as far as that's concerned, except the skills that it takes as an individual contributor are vastly different
(02:38):
from the skills that it takes to be a manager you're literally looking at, and for different things
Govindh Jayaraman (02:45):
Yeah. Well, I mean, look, let's go back to the old system. The cog in the machine system. Cognitive machine system is everybody in a company exists to generate profit or results for the client and nothing else. The ecosystem suggests that there's a 3rd dimension, and that 3rd dimension is to
(03:06):
grow the team right? The personal professional development of the team is the 3rd output, the 3rd dimension that needs to be grown. So there's more going on, isn't there?
Michael Walsh (03:16):
Well, the other thing is that people think that that the
boss employee from the 20th century model, you know, cogs and machine that that's always the way management's been. It's not before that we had something too like in the 18 hundreds, you know, in the 19th century, and before that, I mean, there was. There was management based on like, I'm the boss. You have to listen to me that that kind of dynamics always been there to sort of a power play. But functionally, management
(03:42):
pre 20th century was based on the apprenticeship model.
Okay? So you're you're the master. I'm the student. You teach me what you know. And my job is to learn. And you've developed that credibility based on the fact that you're really good at what you do, and you're willing to work with me and help me learn. And it was only when when the whole notions of assembly lines came in or lines came in that that this whole
(04:09):
things shifted. So instead of a journeyman teaching me things, you know, as the apprentice, having me work on 6 different things, what happens is that, you know, when you're on an assembly line. If you have 20 different people, each with their apprentices, each looking in their way of doing things, you end up with a lumpy assembly line, whereas in a in a
(04:33):
while it works for apprenticeship, you know you need. So instead of having one person learn 6 things. You have 6 people who each do one thing.
And so as a result, I get consistency in the result. And the only people that actually saw the whole picture were the managers, and they'd be tightly held that information. And that's why they call it command and control, because they were commanding what to be done, but they would control the information. They wouldn't share the information, because otherwise people would start to work around them and try their own different ideas, and it just didn't work very well in an assembly line thing. Even if it worked on this part of the line, it wouldn't work
(05:04):
this part over here. And what happens is the the outputs of this part of the line end up with inputs for the next part, which don't actually work so functionally. That's why it came. And it's only been in the 20th century that that was there. But we think that it's always been there because it's been there for longer than our life, you know
Govindh Jayaraman (05:23):
Well, you know, it's even, you know, when I'm thinking back to some of the great reading that I've done when you go back even further
to, you know the great philosophers, and and even you go back further in terms of the Vedas. Like ancient texts.
In fact, the the greatest teachers
(05:44):
were valued differently than the greatest performers, and and, in fact, the greatest teachers were the people who were able to teach people other people to
do great things in the world, or perform music, or perform in the arts, or think great thoughts, or whatever the case might be, but they were able to inspire others in doing it may not have been the best performers themselves, but they were known and became respected for their ability to teach, not for their ability to do
Michael Walsh (06:21):
Correct and and
in a fast-paced world. One of the things that happened and it started happening in about 1970
is as technology became a larger and larger part of our world. One of the side effects of that is that the seasonality of time started to slip away
Govindh Jayaraman (06:41):
Explain what you mean by that. I know what you mean, but I think someone's listening on the seasonality. What are you talking about?
Michael Walsh (06:47):
Well, here's the thing.
Govindh Jayaraman (06:48):
Sounds very theoretical, but it's not
Michael Walsh (06:50):
Everything had a season, I mean. Look at the plants. They, you know, in the springtime everything blooms in the summertime, they shine in the fall. It starts to. It starts to, you know, they. I mean, you see the coloring changing of the leaves. That's because leaves are dying. And in the wintertime. It's basically socked in, you know, in many places. And of course, in Canada we see this more in other places, but also Northern Europe. There's snow involved. Okay, well.
(07:14):
trees are asleep at that time. They're not dead, and here's how they can, we can tell. And the next spring they get they get buds again. So there's this whole season that you know ebb and flow. In fact, there's a season. There's there's a there's a cadence to how the human body works. I mean, we wake up in the morning, you know. We get fuel in the morning with our breakfast, and then we go through our day. What I've been told is that about one o'clock in the afternoon is when we're we tend to be at.
(07:42):
you know, a low, energetically, and then we pick back up again in the afternoon and into the evening, and then we, you know, we go to sleep as far as that's concerned. So there's there's these cycles of, there's cycles of of
our cadence, of our energy. There's cycles in the planet on the energy, all that stuff. And yes, that is very theoretical. But businesses ran with that, too. You had high seasons, low seasons. You had a bunch of different things like that. With the advent of computer technology, things shifted from being seasonal to being linear. So, in other words, what happened? Was it compressed time? And so people found that there's more to do because of the fact that you can do more, people expect you to do more.
(08:23):
And so what happens was that there's these time crunches that occur. And as a result, people tend to get.
It was interesting because people end up getting higher stress and and they're more interested in for the need for that productivity, as far as that's concerned, to stay competitive. And one of the
(08:45):
casualties of that was this notion of accountability.
Accountability has actually been court sort of trashed. And now it's misunderstood.
you know, from the way it was before.
This is
Govindh Jayaraman (09:01):
Let's let's let's dive into that a little
Michael Walsh (09:04):
Okay. So so I if I'm in. So I get my 1st job, you know, out of school, let's say, okay. And I'm in.
I don't know whatever profession you want to pick me in. And so what happens is I learn how to generate a result, and then I'm accountable to generate a result. And so what happens is that I can stand accountable for generating that result as an individual contributor in the company. And if I'm really good at that. Then the boss makes me a manager, and then what the boss does is says, now your job is to hold these other people to account to actually make sure that you're you're now accountable for everybody's result. Not just yours.
(09:40):
Okay, but if I'm accountable for everybody's result, and I've heard the term hold people accountable, and we use that all the time. And and frankly.
it's a bunch of Bs
Govindh Jayaraman (09:51):
Yeah, I I don't believe in that. I don't believe that you can hold anybody accountable
Michael Walsh (09:56):
No, that's that. To hold somebody accountable would require a level of control over another human being that you don't have short of threats and coercion.
Govindh Jayaraman (10:05):
Correct and and and it sets the onus in the wrong place. Right? I think.
I think, instead, you know, accountability is an outcome of a transparent, supportive ecosystem that grows your people right. If your people are willing to come to you with their challenges as they're trying to develop results, then you've got a true apprenticeship model where you're growing your people. And if you're growing your people
(10:33):
in a way that they want to be grown, then all the better
Michael Walsh (10:37):
Well, the other side of this is, if I was accountable as an individual to generate results.
Now that I'm a manager, why am I accountable for a larger set of results like what happens to my people. They're they're no longer accountable
Govindh Jayaraman (10:49):
Was that
Michael Walsh (10:50):
Well, no, they're accountable, too. It's like, hang on a second. So I can either hold people accountable, which is the misnomer that people use, or I can actually treat people as the people who are accountable. You see, when I got promoted to management, whoever's taking my role is accountable for their results.
So as opposed to actually, you see, this whole notion of an ecosystem sounds like it's a big deal, and in some ways it is. But it's not as hard as people realize or as they think. You know, the
(11:20):
as a manager, I'm not accountable for everybody's results.
No, my accountability is to support people, they're accountable for the specific results. My job is to support them so that they have what they need to do that. So that's different than being accountable for the result, because to be accountable for the actual result, I actually have to control them, and I don't
(11:41):
yet
Govindh Jayaraman (11:41):
Or you have to take over the task
Michael Walsh (11:44):
Well.
Govindh Jayaraman (11:45):
Which makes no sense, because that's not the job.
Michael Walsh (11:48):
Well, if you but at the same time, if you look at our little, if you look at our little napkin. Okay? So what you've got. There is the manager. You see, the people are actually accountable for the results. The manager's job is to support the people. Now, what happens if I've got some skill deficiencies, or I got different things there. Well, notice that the manager is also an individual.
(12:09):
and he or she will actually develop their own results in addition, and sometimes those results are backstopping where there's a shortage on the team.
So I might step in and do this piece, or I might step in and do that piece because of the fact that I know, or I could have my own specialty within the larger within the larger organization. So so sometimes, you know, they do backstop people as far as that's concerned. Yet this is also where managers get get confused because they're like, well, okay, so what they do is I know how to do my job. I know how to do it really. Well.
(12:43):
I'm really good at it, and that's where I get my energy from is when people really appreciate the great work I do. Then I'll just tell the people to do it, to do things my way because it worked for me. So it must work for them.
And and we have a.
we have a word or a term for that.
Okay, and the term is called one world delusion.
(13:11):
Like people think there's only one world
rather than 7.9 billion iterations of it.
Govindh Jayaraman (13:19):
Right.
Michael Walsh (13:20):
And so and so, so how many kids you've got? You got? What? 3 kids, 3 kids, okay and their ages
Govindh Jayaraman (13:28):
1816, 14,
Michael Walsh (13:30):
Okay, so let's look at your 18 year old and your 14 year old.
Do they really experience the world the same way?
Govindh Jayaraman (13:39):
Oh, gosh! No!
Michael Walsh (13:41):
Like, completely, differently, don't they? Any 14 year old, any age? They're just yeah. So so you could claim it's the same so fine. Technically, they'll stand on the same driveway when they're in front of your place. Yet
their experience even of the driveway will be different.
Govindh Jayaraman (13:58):
Absolutely.
Michael Walsh (13:58):
You know. So like, if you know, if there's a basketball hoop at the end, and one likes basketball and the other one doesn't. That's like an unneeded thing. And the other person thinks that's that's a great, you know. That's a great instrument like we literally the 18 year old drives. I bet
Govindh Jayaraman (14:14):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (14:15):
And the 14 year old clearly doesn't yet stage to drive is 16
Govindh Jayaraman (14:19):
Better not
Michael Walsh (14:20):
Exactly. But there's 2 completely different worlds, aren't they?
Govindh Jayaraman (14:23):
Right.
Michael Walsh (14:24):
So so there are 7.9 billion iterations of the world. And and for most people
Govindh Jayaraman (14:29):
Point 6 2 actually
Michael Walsh (14:32):
Oh! Is it that high now
Govindh Jayaraman (14:33):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (14:34):
Wow, okay, so so the bottom line, though, is, everybody has their own perspective on it, and
Govindh Jayaraman (14:40):
Point 0 6 2 sorry
Michael Walsh (14:42):
Yeah, I was, gonna say, 8.6. That's a big jump.
Govindh Jayaraman (14:44):
Big jump, no, 8.0 6 2
Michael Walsh (14:48):
Okay, so 8.1 billion
there, there's my rounding and like an entrepreneur, I always round a little bit up
Govindh Jayaraman (14:56):
Little up.
Michael Walsh (14:56):
Yeah, you talk about up when you're talking about your revenues and stuff. At least, that's my experience. The entrepreneurs I I meet
Everybody's got a different perspective.
So so there is not one world. So you can't just do things the way I do them. Because while it worked for me doesn't mean it's going to work for you. And so if you actually look, you see, in part of the place where there's confusion is because I'm also accountable for individual results. What's happening is that I'll actually do that. And I just tell them to follow my, you know my way. And so
(15:27):
you know. So the question is, okay. So if I was to look at this strategically and not just say, Oh, well, you have to be good to your people, and that sounds like such well-intended, misguided drivel that most people dismiss it. And my attitude is, I want a manager to be
strategic about the support of their people. So so in order to do that, there's actually 4 things that the manager needs to do. So, the 1st thing is to get to know their people to the point of understanding what makes them tick? Okay, this means learning their strengths. How do I tap their strengths, learning their weak spots? How do I avoid those? Because if I have people working at their weak spots, I just don't get as much from them. It's like, if I'm left handed. If I had to write with my right hand every day
(16:13):
you're going to get less productivity out of me
if I can write my left handed, you know. Then then my notes are going to come down a lot faster. So so, you know, tap the strengths, avoid the weak spots. How they prefer to work with other people. If I can work with my people in ways that that they prefer to work with other people. My teams just run more smoothly, you know, and so behind
Govindh Jayaraman (16:34):
Goes back to one of those traits that we talked about in the last napkin, which was flexibility. Right? Flexibility.
Good bosses are flexible.
Yeah. Bad bosses are seen as being inflexible
Michael Walsh (16:45):
Correct. And that's just in my opinion, it's just short-sighted. So it's not like good bosses. Are these altruistic humans that sing Kumbaya a lot. What they are is strategists who understand people and human behavior. And if they can actually tap human behavior and realize, you know what I can either work with my people, or I can decide that things should go this way and work with my shoulds, which are moral imperatives, either imposed on yourself or imposed on others, and and
(17:12):
it's just not very pretty. So you know, people spend a lot of time shooting all over themselves in each other's, and it's just kind of smelly
Govindh Jayaraman (17:21):
No, that doesn't work.
Michael Walsh (17:22):
So that's 1 thing they need to do is to really get to know their people and understand what makes them tick. The second thing they need to do is to support the individual growth of people based on understanding each team member. Okay? And this is where those career development growth plans come in. Because if I overlay those onto a person's job.
I'm actually speaking to them in terms that they understand and appreciate. They feel understood for what they're trying to accomplish, and because the job are the to do's or the tasks that actually give them that growth plan, I get the job done while focusing on their growth, as far as that's concerned. So when I'm looking at the individual growth of each person.
(18:05):
absolutely do that, you know. Make sure that I've got the growth plan and I'm aligning the job. Now, the 3rd thing I need to do
obviously, is grow the team and support the employees in the skills and habits needed to effectively work together so that they can generate the collective outcomes, not just their individual results. And that's when we talk. Remember, we talked about the the Social Contract.
(18:28):
That's where Number 2 in the Social Contract is so important. It's, you know, work together to generate collective client results, but also professional training and growth to support people, not just with their individual results, but with their team results as well. Okay? And then the 4th thing that I'm doing as a manager is to nurture the evolution of the company's culture within the team.
(18:49):
So you know, it's an extension of this whole notion of stronger culture. But here's the thing, and it's also an extension of the teamwork.
The better I have them working with each other, the more they feel like they have each other's backs, they will bring a different level of accountability to the table. And strategically, this just works better. It's easier for the employees to accomplish. And frankly, this is the stuff of high performance teams
Govindh Jayaraman (19:16):
And this is also why we break
big organizations into teams, because teams are agile and can execute in different directions more quickly shifting along the way versus the whole organization is difficult to move right
Michael Walsh (19:34):
Well, that's that's half of it. The other half of is, it allows me to avoid competency frameworks. You see, if the teams are hard
clients and customers pay for results.
They come to you because they want a result that your people provide through whatever it is that their deliverable is they give the clients and customers access to a result. The teams can be designed around results. So it's very focused, very specific. If I actually can manage
Govindh Jayaraman (20:07):
With and through teams. I'm in a situation. I can keep my focus on the results, because that's what the clients pay for. That's what we get the profit from. And that's how we can afford to continue the professional growth. And where's the professional growth specifically in their ability to generate the results. If I go to competency frameworks, everybody at a level 4 has to achieve these 7 things. Well, what if somebody's good at 2 or 3 of them, and they're not so good at 2 or 3 of them
Michael Walsh (20:32):
That means I have to have people working as much time on things that they're not as good at as the things they are good at. And all I'm going to do is drain energy from my ability to generate those results, and because people will do what pays them more. And so if competencies are my focus, then I go for competencies. If I can keep them in teams working on complementary strengths and actually help them build their careers in terms that are that matter to them. I'm in a situation where
(20:57):
I really am focused on them. Yet at the same time, I'm focused on the same results. Orientation that allows people to that allows people to actually prosper. You know they they not only survive, they grow and they prosper
Govindh Jayaraman (21:10):
So one of the things that we talked about again in our previous napkin was this idea that good bosses are considered to be transparent. But I also think that part of this is by being transparent, by bringing that forward.
One of the things that comes out of this evolution is a transparency from the people, from the team backward, upward in the organization. And that's really where the opportunity for growth happens. But it is vital pillar. Because if you're growing the team, they want to have that because they're growing in the direction that they want to grow. They know that you're interested in that kind of growth. They know that the individual growth is being supported, and they understand.
(21:55):
you know.
they understood that they're understood. They're seen. They're seen by their people. They're seen by their team. They're seen by their boss right? And if those things exist, people can volunteer for accountability. People can volunteer to be accountable. You can't hold them accountable, but they can certainly volunteer and say, This is where I'm at.
Michael Walsh (22:12):
Well, you see, here's the thing. They are accountable.
If you don't show up for a few days.
you no longer have a place there. There are consequences to everything you do. If you show up early and you're working hard, and you actually make a difference. And you're generating more results. Again, there's consequences, and those are much, you know, more interesting than the other ones. So there's all they're always accountable. The key is not to
(22:36):
worry about holding them accountable. What if I held them as accountable?
What if I treat you as somebody who's accountable, and I partner with you in your accountability
See, because if I'm partnering with you in your accountability, that's there. And, by the way, there's this whole notion about transparency, and what I should have most people misunderstand transparency.
Transparency is not opening and laying bare all your stuff. It doesn't mean showing them your P. And L. If that's not what you're interested in doing. What it does mean is, if I actually ask for something, or if I want to head in a direction to share the thinking why and think, in other words, give them the thinking involved, and work with them as opposed to actually just imposing something, without sharing any reasons
(23:20):
or any rationale, or anything like that. So if I have enough power of influence, people will accept it, and if not, then we debate it, and we'll sort it out together because they see the dynamics that are behind something. And as a result, they're part of and can get included in having input in the decision, even if they're not making it, and that is transparency that anybody can get behind as opposed
Govindh Jayaraman (23:43):
Absolutely.
Michael Walsh (23:43):
Transparency called, you know. Open up all your books for everybody. That's that's not what this means at all.
Govindh Jayaraman (23:48):
No, no, it means sharing. Why, something's important now. I wanna get somebody's listening to this right now, and they're looking at this going. Wait a minute. Managers have, as individuals have results that they backstop their people with. That sounds a little bit like reverse delegation where people just are sloughing stuff backwards to the leader. You're not saying that you're saying something different
Michael Walsh (24:10):
I need 5 people for my job. I've got 3 people that showed up today, one person sick, and I'm perpetually short. One person, because head office is trying to get me another body.
You know what? Sometimes you roll up your sleeves and you do. You're doing part of the job. So am I doing their job for them? No, they're accountable for their own jobs. But that doesn't mean they're accountable for jobs that I haven't supported. I mean, keep in mind that part of the job of the manager manager is accountable, just like any other team member is
(24:35):
for their part of it, and they either bring a special expertise to the table, or they bring the ability to fill in the blanks when the team just doesn't have it, or if somebody's going through a learning curve. So it's more about that than it is anything else which which leads to a different thing when you're looking at sizes of teams and things like that, and whether I use my expertise or whether I just supporting a team, one of the questions that everybody asks is, well.
(25:00):
how many people is the right people to manage? Have you ever have you ever thought of that?
Govindh Jayaraman (25:05):
I've thought of it. Yeah.
Michael Walsh (25:07):
Did you have an answer?
Govindh Jayaraman (25:08):
I don't think it's 1 size fits all
Michael Walsh (25:11):
Actually, I have a I have a definitive answer.
Govindh Jayaraman (25:14):
Okay.
Michael Walsh (25:15):
Okay, it depends.
Govindh Jayaraman (25:20):
It's not
Michael Walsh (25:22):
One size fits all. But here's the thing. The number of people to manage is as many people as you can meet one on one with for 15 to 20 min every week week in, week out.
So that if that's 2 people, because I'm doing so much stuff as a specialist, then the number that's right for me to manage is 2. If it's
(25:44):
8 people, because of the fact that I'm actually don't have separate stuff that I'm doing, or some very small stuff it could be. It could be 8, I mean, I've seen situations where people could run with 12 people, and it starts to get really hairy at that point, but at the same time I've seen people do that now. A lot of people say, well, I meet with my people in a stand up every morning they could meet as a group. And so that should do it. It's like, actually no
Govindh Jayaraman (26:06):
No.
Michael Walsh (26:07):
The the thing about one on one is, every person needs to be seen and heard, and they need to do it individually. It was interesting because Marcus Buckingham did a bunch of research on this piece, too, and what they found was that if somebody was meeting with their boss once a week, and we're not talking about a half an hour. We're not talking about an hour. They were doing 10 or 15 min
(26:30):
connections, but it's like, how's it going, you know. How did your last week go? What do you got coming up for this week? You know. Have you hit any stumbling blocks. How can I support you? I mean literally 3 or 4 questions that just keep them connected. And the reason and what they found is, if somebody was was meeting that much time. Okay.
again, 1015 min once a week, one on one not not in groups. What they found was that on average productivity went up by 13%
Govindh Jayaraman (26:59):
Yeah, and there's a dramatic cutoff, though I used to
dramatic reduction when you go to once a month
Michael Walsh (27:06):
Well, no!
Govindh Jayaraman (27:06):
Bye.
Michael Walsh (27:07):
We go to every 3 weeks.
It was 5% decrease in production, not over no contact at all.
Govindh Jayaraman (27:15):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (27:16):
Because when it's once a week, and they found that even every other week still didn't do the trick. If it's once a week.
people need support in real time.
So if I know that my meeting with my boss is on Tuesday afternoons, and I something comes up on a Monday, and I couldn't get through to the boss. I could connect on Tuesday, and we can sort this stuff out while it's still small. If I actually have. If it waits 2 weeks or 3 weeks. What happens is this is no longer about the day-to-day stuff. This is no longer real time. This is checking up on me, and when I feel like you're checking up on me, whether it's once every 3 weeks, once, every 2,
(27:50):
2 weeks, or even once a month. It's like it's like this is not for my benefit. It's for yours, because I'm not getting any benefit from it. I had to figure out what I needed to figure out, you know, on the 3rd of the month. Because I'm not. You're not available to the 15th
Govindh Jayaraman (28:03):
Yeah. So so here's the other thing that you're not saying.
And I'm so I'm such a big fan of these weekly rhythms. And I think it's so important and so overlooked.
It's also not random, like the meeting. The one-on-ones aren't random. They're scheduled. They're happening every week. It's regular unless somebody is on vacation or dead, you know. Dead's a good excuse, but vacation is a good excuse, too. So if people are away fine, but if they're not away. This is happening on the same schedule every single week without fail. And
(28:40):
do you have an agenda that you recommend around that? What do you? What do you believe should be in that meeting
Michael Walsh (28:49):
You know, it's different for different people, because here's the thing some people really want to be seen and acknowledged for what they contribute.
Other people would actually show you active disdain if you focused on how well they did.
Instead, what they want to do is focus on their people.
So they actually. So if if you're if you really appreciate
(29:11):
feeling appreciated for the work you do, I would look at what you, what you're doing this past week. What have you got coming up, and what are the things I can acknowledge you about? The if you're the second type with it. Really, where you get your energy. Is the development with your team. Then what I might do I might not talk about you at all, I'd say is this, and is there anything? No, no, I'm good. But but I'd say, you know, I noticed that your people are really stepping up. What's what's happening, and then and then they'll talk about their people.
(29:40):
and they actually feel acknowledged in that because they care about their people, and and by supporting somebody in their care for their people, or in acknowledging the growth and development of their people, or even helping them with the trouble spot with one of their people. That's what actually supports that person. So it really does vary by the person. But here's the other side of it. Instead of doing these things like once a year, twice a year
(30:04):
you're in a situation where, just by connecting them with these little mini doses, you have 52 chances to get it right or after. Let's say, somebody has 4 weeks vacation, you still have 48 chances to get it right. So the truth is, you get better at supporting people when you've done it. Lots, you know, frequently, as far as that's concerned. So the good news is that is that this is one of those that even if you don't know how to do it, or what kinds of questions to ask. You know, you'll figure it out
Govindh Jayaraman (30:28):
And start small, start small, ask them what they need. Ask them what's going on right? And and being flexible to someone else's behavior is part of it again, right? And
here's that transparency word again. Say, hey? I want to meet
to help you achieve what you want to do in your role. So
what's that look like this week?
Michael Walsh (30:48):
Well, some people go. I don't need your help to do that. So what? What I may have to do with somebody else's go. Okay. So I know you don't need to meet for me to help you on your role. But I got to tell you my job is to coordinate what you're doing with the other people. I need to get feedback from you so that I can make sure the rest of it's going. Are you willing to do that to help out. Oh, yeah, yeah, for you. No problem. I'd be happy to do that. But don't tell me it's for me, don't you know. And so it's really different for different people
Govindh Jayaraman (31:11):
Right right. And and
if you if you go to bat, you might just get a hit right. You gotta you gotta show up
Michael Walsh (31:19):
Correct.
Govindh Jayaraman (31:20):
All right. Thank you, Michael.
Michael Walsh (31:21):
You're welcome.
Michael Walsh. Welcome back to paper napkin wisdom, the series continues, and we had a spirited conversation about good bosses and bad bosses. In our last
conversation in our last napkin. And you know what I thought was really number. Like a crazy. You shared some numbers around
the percentages of how many people think that they're either good or bad, or in this case how many people thought they were good? They were striking! What were those numbers? Again?
Michael Walsh (00:32):
71%. According to Gallup, 71% of all managers put themselves in the top 20% of all managers.
And Gallup further says that only about 10% of all managers are actually good at their job. They're like really great at their job. So so
if 10% of all managers are great, and 71% of all people who are in management put themselves in the top 20% of all managers.
(00:57):
clearly, there's some disconnects. Let's just say that
Govindh Jayaraman (01:00):
Yeah. So people just don't know whether or not they're good or not. And most people
well are just not as good as they think they are.
Michael Walsh (01:08):
Well. And the thing is that they've been trained in management through osmosis based on the 20th century model. 20th century model. Basically said, run your business.
Excuse me like a well-oiled machine, and as a result, you know, people become cogs in a system
Govindh Jayaraman (01:23):
Yeah. And I think that the word itself is a little broken right? This idea that you're managing people is say, just is to say that you're controlling them in some way, and that's not really what makes
for a great team
Michael Walsh (01:39):
Well, it I don't know. Nobody wants to be controlled
Govindh Jayaraman (01:43):
Right, but but the word itself suggests that so
Michael Walsh (01:46):
Word itself totally suggests that
Govindh Jayaraman (01:48):
So how do we? How do we break free of the mold and grow our managers
Michael Walsh (01:54):
Well.
here's the thing. So so let's take a step back
Govindh Jayaraman (02:04):
Shocking that you'd want to take a step back
Michael Walsh (02:06):
Only on dates that end. And why?
Because here's the, you know. If you remember, how do people get to where they're at? Okay, they excelled as an individual contributor, and the boss said, I trust this person more than others, and as a result, I'm going to make this person the manager, because if I trust them as an individual contributor, hence I should be able to trust them as a manager, or I trust them most as a manager, as far as that's concerned, except the skills that it takes as an individual contributor are vastly different
(02:38):
from the skills that it takes to be a manager you're literally looking at, and for different things
Govindh Jayaraman (02:45):
Yeah. Well, I mean, look, let's go back to the old system. The cog in the machine system. Cognitive machine system is everybody in a company exists to generate profit or results for the client and nothing else. The ecosystem suggests that there's a 3rd dimension, and that 3rd dimension is to
(03:06):
grow the team right? The personal professional development of the team is the 3rd output, the 3rd dimension that needs to be grown. So there's more going on, isn't there?
Michael Walsh (03:16):
Well, the other thing is that people think that that the
boss employee from the 20th century model, you know, cogs and machine that that's always the way management's been. It's not before that we had something too like in the 18 hundreds, you know, in the 19th century, and before that, I mean, there was. There was management based on like, I'm the boss. You have to listen to me that that kind of dynamics always been there to sort of a power play. But functionally, management
(03:42):
pre 20th century was based on the apprenticeship model.
Okay? So you're you're the master. I'm the student. You teach me what you know. And my job is to learn. And you've developed that credibility based on the fact that you're really good at what you do, and you're willing to work with me and help me learn. And it was only when when the whole notions of assembly lines came in or lines came in that that this whole
(04:09):
things shifted. So instead of a journeyman teaching me things, you know, as the apprentice, having me work on 6 different things, what happens is that, you know, when you're on an assembly line. If you have 20 different people, each with their apprentices, each looking in their way of doing things, you end up with a lumpy assembly line, whereas in a in a
(04:33):
while it works for apprenticeship, you know you need. So instead of having one person learn 6 things. You have 6 people who each do one thing.
And so as a result, I get consistency in the result. And the only people that actually saw the whole picture were the managers, and they'd be tightly held that information. And that's why they call it command and control, because they were commanding what to be done, but they would control the information. They wouldn't share the information, because otherwise people would start to work around them and try their own different ideas, and it just didn't work very well in an assembly line thing. Even if it worked on this part of the line, it wouldn't work
(05:04):
this part over here. And what happens is the the outputs of this part of the line end up with inputs for the next part, which don't actually work so functionally. That's why it came. And it's only been in the 20th century that that was there. But we think that it's always been there because it's been there for longer than our life, you know
Govindh Jayaraman (05:23):
Well, you know, it's even, you know, when I'm thinking back to some of the great reading that I've done when you go back even further
to, you know the great philosophers, and and even you go back further in terms of the Vedas. Like ancient texts.
In fact, the the greatest teachers
(05:44):
were valued differently than the greatest performers, and and, in fact, the greatest teachers were the people who were able to teach people other people to
do great things in the world, or perform music, or perform in the arts, or think great thoughts, or whatever the case might be, but they were able to inspire others in doing it may not have been the best performers themselves, but they were known and became respected for their ability to teach, not for their ability to do
Michael Walsh (06:21):
Correct and and
in a fast-paced world. One of the things that happened and it started happening in about 1970
is as technology became a larger and larger part of our world. One of the side effects of that is that the seasonality of time started to slip away
Govindh Jayaraman (06:41):
Explain what you mean by that. I know what you mean, but I think someone's listening on the seasonality. What are you talking about?
Michael Walsh (06:47):
Well, here's the thing.
Govindh Jayaraman (06:48):
Sounds very theoretical, but it's not
Michael Walsh (06:50):
Everything had a season, I mean. Look at the plants. They, you know, in the springtime everything blooms in the summertime, they shine in the fall. It starts to. It starts to, you know, they. I mean, you see the coloring changing of the leaves. That's because leaves are dying. And in the wintertime. It's basically socked in, you know, in many places. And of course, in Canada we see this more in other places, but also Northern Europe. There's snow involved. Okay, well.
(07:14):
trees are asleep at that time. They're not dead, and here's how they can, we can tell. And the next spring they get they get buds again. So there's this whole season that you know ebb and flow. In fact, there's a season. There's there's a there's a cadence to how the human body works. I mean, we wake up in the morning, you know. We get fuel in the morning with our breakfast, and then we go through our day. What I've been told is that about one o'clock in the afternoon is when we're we tend to be at.
(07:42):
you know, a low, energetically, and then we pick back up again in the afternoon and into the evening, and then we, you know, we go to sleep as far as that's concerned. So there's there's these cycles of, there's cycles of of
our cadence, of our energy. There's cycles in the planet on the energy, all that stuff. And yes, that is very theoretical. But businesses ran with that, too. You had high seasons, low seasons. You had a bunch of different things like that. With the advent of computer technology, things shifted from being seasonal to being linear. So, in other words, what happened? Was it compressed time? And so people found that there's more to do because of the fact that you can do more, people expect you to do more.
(08:23):
And so what happens was that there's these time crunches that occur. And as a result, people tend to get.
It was interesting because people end up getting higher stress and and they're more interested in for the need for that productivity, as far as that's concerned, to stay competitive. And one of the
(08:45):
casualties of that was this notion of accountability.
Accountability has actually been court sort of trashed. And now it's misunderstood.
you know, from the way it was before.
This is
Govindh Jayaraman (09:01):
Let's let's let's dive into that a little
Michael Walsh (09:04):
Okay. So so I if I'm in. So I get my 1st job, you know, out of school, let's say, okay. And I'm in.
I don't know whatever profession you want to pick me in. And so what happens is I learn how to generate a result, and then I'm accountable to generate a result. And so what happens is that I can stand accountable for generating that result as an individual contributor in the company. And if I'm really good at that. Then the boss makes me a manager, and then what the boss does is says, now your job is to hold these other people to account to actually make sure that you're you're now accountable for everybody's result. Not just yours.
(09:40):
Okay, but if I'm accountable for everybody's result, and I've heard the term hold people accountable, and we use that all the time. And and frankly.
it's a bunch of Bs
Govindh Jayaraman (09:51):
Yeah, I I don't believe in that. I don't believe that you can hold anybody accountable
Michael Walsh (09:56):
No, that's that. To hold somebody accountable would require a level of control over another human being that you don't have short of threats and coercion.
Govindh Jayaraman (10:05):
Correct and and and it sets the onus in the wrong place. Right? I think.
I think, instead, you know, accountability is an outcome of a transparent, supportive ecosystem that grows your people right. If your people are willing to come to you with their challenges as they're trying to develop results, then you've got a true apprenticeship model where you're growing your people. And if you're growing your people
(10:33):
in a way that they want to be grown, then all the better
Michael Walsh (10:37):
Well, the other side of this is, if I was accountable as an individual to generate results.
Now that I'm a manager, why am I accountable for a larger set of results like what happens to my people. They're they're no longer accountable
Govindh Jayaraman (10:49):
Was that
Michael Walsh (10:50):
Well, no, they're accountable, too. It's like, hang on a second. So I can either hold people accountable, which is the misnomer that people use, or I can actually treat people as the people who are accountable. You see, when I got promoted to management, whoever's taking my role is accountable for their results.
So as opposed to actually, you see, this whole notion of an ecosystem sounds like it's a big deal, and in some ways it is. But it's not as hard as people realize or as they think. You know, the
(11:20):
as a manager, I'm not accountable for everybody's results.
No, my accountability is to support people, they're accountable for the specific results. My job is to support them so that they have what they need to do that. So that's different than being accountable for the result, because to be accountable for the actual result, I actually have to control them, and I don't
(11:41):
yet
Govindh Jayaraman (11:41):
Or you have to take over the task
Michael Walsh (11:44):
Well.
Govindh Jayaraman (11:45):
Which makes no sense, because that's not the job.
Michael Walsh (11:48):
Well, if you but at the same time, if you look at our little, if you look at our little napkin. Okay? So what you've got. There is the manager. You see, the people are actually accountable for the results. The manager's job is to support the people. Now, what happens if I've got some skill deficiencies, or I got different things there. Well, notice that the manager is also an individual.
(12:09):
and he or she will actually develop their own results in addition, and sometimes those results are backstopping where there's a shortage on the team.
So I might step in and do this piece, or I might step in and do that piece because of the fact that I know, or I could have my own specialty within the larger within the larger organization. So so sometimes, you know, they do backstop people as far as that's concerned. Yet this is also where managers get get confused because they're like, well, okay, so what they do is I know how to do my job. I know how to do it really. Well.
(12:43):
I'm really good at it, and that's where I get my energy from is when people really appreciate the great work I do. Then I'll just tell the people to do it, to do things my way because it worked for me. So it must work for them.
And and we have a.
we have a word or a term for that.
Okay, and the term is called one world delusion.
(13:11):
Like people think there's only one world
rather than 7.9 billion iterations of it.
Govindh Jayaraman (13:19):
Right.
Michael Walsh (13:20):
And so and so, so how many kids you've got? You got? What? 3 kids, 3 kids, okay and their ages
Govindh Jayaraman (13:28):
1816, 14,
Michael Walsh (13:30):
Okay, so let's look at your 18 year old and your 14 year old.
Do they really experience the world the same way?
Govindh Jayaraman (13:39):
Oh, gosh! No!
Michael Walsh (13:41):
Like, completely, differently, don't they? Any 14 year old, any age? They're just yeah. So so you could claim it's the same so fine. Technically, they'll stand on the same driveway when they're in front of your place. Yet
their experience even of the driveway will be different.
Govindh Jayaraman (13:58):
Absolutely.
Michael Walsh (13:58):
You know. So like, if you know, if there's a basketball hoop at the end, and one likes basketball and the other one doesn't. That's like an unneeded thing. And the other person thinks that's that's a great, you know. That's a great instrument like we literally the 18 year old drives. I bet
Govindh Jayaraman (14:14):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (14:15):
And the 14 year old clearly doesn't yet stage to drive is 16
Govindh Jayaraman (14:19):
Better not
Michael Walsh (14:20):
Exactly. But there's 2 completely different worlds, aren't they?
Govindh Jayaraman (14:23):
Right.
Michael Walsh (14:24):
So so there are 7.9 billion iterations of the world. And and for most people
Govindh Jayaraman (14:29):
Point 6 2 actually
Michael Walsh (14:32):
Oh! Is it that high now
Govindh Jayaraman (14:33):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (14:34):
Wow, okay, so so the bottom line, though, is, everybody has their own perspective on it, and
Govindh Jayaraman (14:40):
Point 0 6 2 sorry
Michael Walsh (14:42):
Yeah, I was, gonna say, 8.6. That's a big jump.
Govindh Jayaraman (14:44):
Big jump, no, 8.0 6 2
Michael Walsh (14:48):
Okay, so 8.1 billion
there, there's my rounding and like an entrepreneur, I always round a little bit up
Govindh Jayaraman (14:56):
Little up.
Michael Walsh (14:56):
Yeah, you talk about up when you're talking about your revenues and stuff. At least, that's my experience. The entrepreneurs I I meet
Everybody's got a different perspective.
So so there is not one world. So you can't just do things the way I do them. Because while it worked for me doesn't mean it's going to work for you. And so if you actually look, you see, in part of the place where there's confusion is because I'm also accountable for individual results. What's happening is that I'll actually do that. And I just tell them to follow my, you know my way. And so
(15:27):
you know. So the question is, okay. So if I was to look at this strategically and not just say, Oh, well, you have to be good to your people, and that sounds like such well-intended, misguided drivel that most people dismiss it. And my attitude is, I want a manager to be
strategic about the support of their people. So so in order to do that, there's actually 4 things that the manager needs to do. So, the 1st thing is to get to know their people to the point of understanding what makes them tick? Okay, this means learning their strengths. How do I tap their strengths, learning their weak spots? How do I avoid those? Because if I have people working at their weak spots, I just don't get as much from them. It's like, if I'm left handed. If I had to write with my right hand every day
(16:13):
you're going to get less productivity out of me
if I can write my left handed, you know. Then then my notes are going to come down a lot faster. So so, you know, tap the strengths, avoid the weak spots. How they prefer to work with other people. If I can work with my people in ways that that they prefer to work with other people. My teams just run more smoothly, you know, and so behind
Govindh Jayaraman (16:34):
Goes back to one of those traits that we talked about in the last napkin, which was flexibility. Right? Flexibility.
Good bosses are flexible.
Yeah. Bad bosses are seen as being inflexible
Michael Walsh (16:45):
Correct. And that's just in my opinion, it's just short-sighted. So it's not like good bosses. Are these altruistic humans that sing Kumbaya a lot. What they are is strategists who understand people and human behavior. And if they can actually tap human behavior and realize, you know what I can either work with my people, or I can decide that things should go this way and work with my shoulds, which are moral imperatives, either imposed on yourself or imposed on others, and and
(17:12):
it's just not very pretty. So you know, people spend a lot of time shooting all over themselves in each other's, and it's just kind of smelly
Govindh Jayaraman (17:21):
No, that doesn't work.
Michael Walsh (17:22):
So that's 1 thing they need to do is to really get to know their people and understand what makes them tick. The second thing they need to do is to support the individual growth of people based on understanding each team member. Okay? And this is where those career development growth plans come in. Because if I overlay those onto a person's job.
I'm actually speaking to them in terms that they understand and appreciate. They feel understood for what they're trying to accomplish, and because the job are the to do's or the tasks that actually give them that growth plan, I get the job done while focusing on their growth, as far as that's concerned. So when I'm looking at the individual growth of each person.
(18:05):
absolutely do that, you know. Make sure that I've got the growth plan and I'm aligning the job. Now, the 3rd thing I need to do
obviously, is grow the team and support the employees in the skills and habits needed to effectively work together so that they can generate the collective outcomes, not just their individual results. And that's when we talk. Remember, we talked about the the Social Contract.
(18:28):
That's where Number 2 in the Social Contract is so important. It's, you know, work together to generate collective client results, but also professional training and growth to support people, not just with their individual results, but with their team results as well. Okay? And then the 4th thing that I'm doing as a manager is to nurture the evolution of the company's culture within the team.
(18:49):
So you know, it's an extension of this whole notion of stronger culture. But here's the thing, and it's also an extension of the teamwork.
The better I have them working with each other, the more they feel like they have each other's backs, they will bring a different level of accountability to the table. And strategically, this just works better. It's easier for the employees to accomplish. And frankly, this is the stuff of high performance teams
Govindh Jayaraman (19:16):
And this is also why we break
big organizations into teams, because teams are agile and can execute in different directions more quickly shifting along the way versus the whole organization is difficult to move right
Michael Walsh (19:34):
Well, that's that's half of it. The other half of is, it allows me to avoid competency frameworks. You see, if the teams are hard
clients and customers pay for results.
They come to you because they want a result that your people provide through whatever it is that their deliverable is they give the clients and customers access to a result. The teams can be designed around results. So it's very focused, very specific. If I actually can manage
Govindh Jayaraman (20:07):
With and through teams. I'm in a situation. I can keep my focus on the results, because that's what the clients pay for. That's what we get the profit from. And that's how we can afford to continue the professional growth. And where's the professional growth specifically in their ability to generate the results. If I go to competency frameworks, everybody at a level 4 has to achieve these 7 things. Well, what if somebody's good at 2 or 3 of them, and they're not so good at 2 or 3 of them
Michael Walsh (20:32):
That means I have to have people working as much time on things that they're not as good at as the things they are good at. And all I'm going to do is drain energy from my ability to generate those results, and because people will do what pays them more. And so if competencies are my focus, then I go for competencies. If I can keep them in teams working on complementary strengths and actually help them build their careers in terms that are that matter to them. I'm in a situation where
(20:57):
I really am focused on them. Yet at the same time, I'm focused on the same results. Orientation that allows people to that allows people to actually prosper. You know they they not only survive, they grow and they prosper
Govindh Jayaraman (21:10):
So one of the things that we talked about again in our previous napkin was this idea that good bosses are considered to be transparent. But I also think that part of this is by being transparent, by bringing that forward.
One of the things that comes out of this evolution is a transparency from the people, from the team backward, upward in the organization. And that's really where the opportunity for growth happens. But it is vital pillar. Because if you're growing the team, they want to have that because they're growing in the direction that they want to grow. They know that you're interested in that kind of growth. They know that the individual growth is being supported, and they understand.
(21:55):
you know.
they understood that they're understood. They're seen. They're seen by their people. They're seen by their team. They're seen by their boss right? And if those things exist, people can volunteer for accountability. People can volunteer to be accountable. You can't hold them accountable, but they can certainly volunteer and say, This is where I'm at.
Michael Walsh (22:12):
Well, you see, here's the thing. They are accountable.
If you don't show up for a few days.
you no longer have a place there. There are consequences to everything you do. If you show up early and you're working hard, and you actually make a difference. And you're generating more results. Again, there's consequences, and those are much, you know, more interesting than the other ones. So there's all they're always accountable. The key is not to
(22:36):
worry about holding them accountable. What if I held them as accountable?
What if I treat you as somebody who's accountable, and I partner with you in your accountability
See, because if I'm partnering with you in your accountability, that's there. And, by the way, there's this whole notion about transparency, and what I should have most people misunderstand transparency.
Transparency is not opening and laying bare all your stuff. It doesn't mean showing them your P. And L. If that's not what you're interested in doing. What it does mean is, if I actually ask for something, or if I want to head in a direction to share the thinking why and think, in other words, give them the thinking involved, and work with them as opposed to actually just imposing something, without sharing any reasons
(23:20):
or any rationale, or anything like that. So if I have enough power of influence, people will accept it, and if not, then we debate it, and we'll sort it out together because they see the dynamics that are behind something. And as a result, they're part of and can get included in having input in the decision, even if they're not making it, and that is transparency that anybody can get behind as opposed
Govindh Jayaraman (23:43):
Absolutely.
Michael Walsh (23:43):
Transparency called, you know. Open up all your books for everybody. That's that's not what this means at all.
Govindh Jayaraman (23:48):
No, no, it means sharing. Why, something's important now. I wanna get somebody's listening to this right now, and they're looking at this going. Wait a minute. Managers have, as individuals have results that they backstop their people with. That sounds a little bit like reverse delegation where people just are sloughing stuff backwards to the leader. You're not saying that you're saying something different
Michael Walsh (24:10):
I need 5 people for my job. I've got 3 people that showed up today, one person sick, and I'm perpetually short. One person, because head office is trying to get me another body.
You know what? Sometimes you roll up your sleeves and you do. You're doing part of the job. So am I doing their job for them? No, they're accountable for their own jobs. But that doesn't mean they're accountable for jobs that I haven't supported. I mean, keep in mind that part of the job of the manager manager is accountable, just like any other team member is
(24:35):
for their part of it, and they either bring a special expertise to the table, or they bring the ability to fill in the blanks when the team just doesn't have it, or if somebody's going through a learning curve. So it's more about that than it is anything else which which leads to a different thing when you're looking at sizes of teams and things like that, and whether I use my expertise or whether I just supporting a team, one of the questions that everybody asks is, well.
(25:00):
how many people is the right people to manage? Have you ever have you ever thought of that?
Govindh Jayaraman (25:05):
I've thought of it. Yeah.
Michael Walsh (25:07):
Did you have an answer?
Govindh Jayaraman (25:08):
I don't think it's 1 size fits all
Michael Walsh (25:11):
Actually, I have a I have a definitive answer.
Govindh Jayaraman (25:14):
Okay.
Michael Walsh (25:15):
Okay, it depends.
Govindh Jayaraman (25:20):
It's not
Michael Walsh (25:22):
One size fits all. But here's the thing. The number of people to manage is as many people as you can meet one on one with for 15 to 20 min every week week in, week out.
So that if that's 2 people, because I'm doing so much stuff as a specialist, then the number that's right for me to manage is 2. If it's
(25:44):
8 people, because of the fact that I'm actually don't have separate stuff that I'm doing, or some very small stuff it could be. It could be 8, I mean, I've seen situations where people could run with 12 people, and it starts to get really hairy at that point, but at the same time I've seen people do that now. A lot of people say, well, I meet with my people in a stand up every morning they could meet as a group. And so that should do it. It's like, actually no
Govindh Jayaraman (26:06):
No.
Michael Walsh (26:07):
The the thing about one on one is, every person needs to be seen and heard, and they need to do it individually. It was interesting because Marcus Buckingham did a bunch of research on this piece, too, and what they found was that if somebody was meeting with their boss once a week, and we're not talking about a half an hour. We're not talking about an hour. They were doing 10 or 15 min
(26:30):
connections, but it's like, how's it going, you know. How did your last week go? What do you got coming up for this week? You know. Have you hit any stumbling blocks. How can I support you? I mean literally 3 or 4 questions that just keep them connected. And the reason and what they found is, if somebody was was meeting that much time. Okay.
again, 1015 min once a week, one on one not not in groups. What they found was that on average productivity went up by 13%
Govindh Jayaraman (26:59):
Yeah, and there's a dramatic cutoff, though I used to
dramatic reduction when you go to once a month
Michael Walsh (27:06):
Well, no!
Govindh Jayaraman (27:06):
Bye.
Michael Walsh (27:07):
We go to every 3 weeks.
It was 5% decrease in production, not over no contact at all.
Govindh Jayaraman (27:15):
Yeah.
Michael Walsh (27:16):
Because when it's once a week, and they found that even every other week still didn't do the trick. If it's once a week.
people need support in real time.
So if I know that my meeting with my boss is on Tuesday afternoons, and I something comes up on a Monday, and I couldn't get through to the boss. I could connect on Tuesday, and we can sort this stuff out while it's still small. If I actually have. If it waits 2 weeks or 3 weeks. What happens is this is no longer about the day-to-day stuff. This is no longer real time. This is checking up on me, and when I feel like you're checking up on me, whether it's once every 3 weeks, once, every 2,
(27:50):
2 weeks, or even once a month. It's like it's like this is not for my benefit. It's for yours, because I'm not getting any benefit from it. I had to figure out what I needed to figure out, you know, on the 3rd of the month. Because I'm not. You're not available to the 15th
Govindh Jayaraman (28:03):
Yeah. So so here's the other thing that you're not saying.
And I'm so I'm such a big fan of these weekly rhythms. And I think it's so important and so overlooked.
It's also not random, like the meeting. The one-on-ones aren't random. They're scheduled. They're happening every week. It's regular unless somebody is on vacation or dead, you know. Dead's a good excuse, but vacation is a good excuse, too. So if people are away fine, but if they're not away. This is happening on the same schedule every single week without fail. And
(28:40):
do you have an agenda that you recommend around that? What do you? What do you believe should be in that meeting
Michael Walsh (28:49):
You know, it's different for different people, because here's the thing some people really want to be seen and acknowledged for what they contribute.
Other people would actually show you active disdain if you focused on how well they did.
Instead, what they want to do is focus on their people.
So they actually. So if if you're if you really appreciate
(29:11):
feeling appreciated for the work you do, I would look at what you, what you're doing this past week. What have you got coming up, and what are the things I can acknowledge you about? The if you're the second type with it. Really, where you get your energy. Is the development with your team. Then what I might do I might not talk about you at all, I'd say is this, and is there anything? No, no, I'm good. But but I'd say, you know, I noticed that your people are really stepping up. What's what's happening, and then and then they'll talk about their people.
(29:40):
and they actually feel acknowledged in that because they care about their people, and and by supporting somebody in their care for their people, or in acknowledging the growth and development of their people, or even helping them with the trouble spot with one of their people. That's what actually supports that person. So it really does vary by the person. But here's the other side of it. Instead of doing these things like once a year, twice a year
(30:04):
you're in a situation where, just by connecting them with these little mini doses, you have 52 chances to get it right or after. Let's say, somebody has 4 weeks vacation, you still have 48 chances to get it right. So the truth is, you get better at supporting people when you've done it. Lots, you know, frequently, as far as that's concerned. So the good news is that is that this is one of those that even if you don't know how to do it, or what kinds of questions to ask. You know, you'll figure it out
Govindh Jayaraman (30:28):
And start small, start small, ask them what they need. Ask them what's going on right? And and being flexible to someone else's behavior is part of it again, right? And
here's that transparency word again. Say, hey? I want to meet
to help you achieve what you want to do in your role. So
what's that look like this week?
Michael Walsh (30:48):
Well, some people go. I don't need your help to do that. So what? What I may have to do with somebody else's go. Okay. So I know you don't need to meet for me to help you on your role. But I got to tell you my job is to coordinate what you're doing with the other people. I need to get feedback from you so that I can make sure the rest of it's going. Are you willing to do that to help out. Oh, yeah, yeah, for you. No problem. I'd be happy to do that. But don't tell me it's for me, don't you know. And so it's really different for different people
Govindh Jayaraman (31:11):
Right right. And and
if you if you go to bat, you might just get a hit right. You gotta you gotta show up
Michael Walsh (31:19):
Correct.
Govindh Jayaraman (31:20):
All right. Thank you, Michael.
Michael Walsh (31:21):
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.
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.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!