February 28, 2025 • 46 mins
In this episode, we’re diving into a critical transformation happening across industries—the decline of middle management. As companies flatten their structures in pursuit of efficiency, what happens to organizational communication and workplace culture? Are we losing vital connectors who bridge leadership and employees, or is this the evolution of a more agile and collaborative workforce?
To talk about this important topic, we’re delighted to welcome Ron Coverson, an executive-level human resources professional and business consultant, and is currently the Assistant Dean of Academic Personnel and Human Resources for the University of California, Berkeley Law School.
Learn more about UC Berkeley Extension @https://bit.ly/4hXbD6N
Read this episode's transcript @https://bit.ly/3FqqyIc
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
[MUSIC PLAYING]
(00:02):
RON COVERSON (00:06):
You don't need overseers.
You don't need people to,frankly, provide a command
and control kind of directionalapproach to management.
You've got amazingly smart,capable individual contributors
who are somewhatentrepreneurial.
They prefer topartner with others,
to collaborate with others, toshare ideas, to be creative,
(00:28):
to provoke, and innovation.
JILL FINLAYSON (00:32):
Welcome to the Future of Work Podcast,
with Berkeley Extensionand EDGE in Tech
at the University ofCalifornia, focused
on expanding diversityand gender equity in tech.
EDGE in Tech is part of theInnovation Hub at CITRIS--
the Center for ITResearch in the Interest
of Society-- and theBanatao Institute.
UC Berkeley Extension isthe continuing education arm
of UC Berkeley.
(00:53):
In this episode, we're divinginto the critical transformation
happening across industries, thedecline of middle management.
As companies flattentheir structures
in pursuit ofefficiency, what happens
to organizational communication?
Workplace culture?
Are we losing vitalconnectors who
bridge leadership and employees,or is this the evolution
(01:16):
of a more agile andcollaborative workforce?
To talk about thisimportant topic,
we're delighted towelcome Ron Coverson.
Ron is an executive-levelhuman resources professional
and business consultant,and is currently
the Assistant Dean of theAcademic Personnel and Human
Resources for the University ofCalifornia, Berkeley Law School.
Ron is experienced asan executive director
(01:37):
of human resources, training,and organizational development,
and as an instructor, curriculumdesigner, strategic planner,
and businessdevelopment manager.
Ron's employers have included UCBerkeley, Stanford University,
the America's Cup EventAuthority, the McKesson
Corporation, and LeviStrauss & Company.
For the past 10 years,Ron has partnered
with senior and middlemanagers, focusing
(01:59):
on leadership development,strategic planning, culture
change, talent, andperformance management.
He's also an esteemed instructorat the University of California
Berkeley Extension.
Welcome, Ron.
RON COVERSON (02:10):
Thank you, Jill.
It's a pleasure to be here.
Thanks for having me today.
JILL FINLAYSON (02:15):
This is such a great topic
to talk aboutbecause everybody's
noticing a lot ofchange happening
in the privatesector in particular,
but across the board, inorganizations, certainly
in government atthis moment in time.
So what does it mean when we sayorganizations are flattening?
RON COVERSON (02:31):
What it means is we're going through,
I would say, justanother transformation,
from the early stages of thetechnology revolution that
occurred in the '80sand particularly
in the '90s, and let's just say,at the beginning of the 21st
century, into another levelof industrial transformation
in the technology sense.
(02:51):
Meaning, AI is anunavoidable reality.
It is the next level, thenext so-called dimension,
of technological evolution.
And the most significantchanges we've seen,
that will create somechallenges for professionals
and for leadership andmanagers, but also,
offers an amazingarray of opportunities
(03:13):
for high-level efficiencies andsolving problems in a much more
dynamic and fastway, if you will,
in allowing people to reallypursue their approaches
to building organizationsmore relationally
in a way that givesthem the time to do so.
And that's, Ithink, part of what
we'll be talking about today.
JILL FINLAYSON (03:32):
Yeah, I'm looking forward to digging
into that relational piece.
But as we thinkabout-- like when
I think about anorganizational structure,
I think of thatpyramid, where you've
got one person at the top, thentwo people, then eight people,
and so forth, downthis big triangle.
Why is that organizationalstructure changing?
You said AI was one reason,but why would AI change that?
(03:53):
Why would that cut out a layer?
RON COVERSON (03:55):
Well, I think the layer cutting out will continue,
but it began really,in the 1980s.
I'm a bit of a historian, andif you look at what happened
in the 1980s, it was thebeginning of the elimination
of the middle manager, becausewe were on the cusp of this
amazing transition fromthe industrial age,
which was continuing through the'60s and '70s even to a certain
(04:17):
extent, although Silicon Valleywas emerging at that time.
And eventually, we realizedthat work gets done in teams,
and that was much more so in thelate '80s and the '90s, and you
don't need overseers.
You don't need people to,frankly, provide a command
and control kind of directionalapproach to management.
(04:41):
You've got amazingly smart,capable individual contributors
who are somewhatentrepreneurial.
They prefer topartner with others,
to collaborate withothers, to share ideas,
to be creative, toprovoke an innovation,
and to initiate actions more inthe context of a project process
with collaboratively-oriented,really smart people, Jill.
(05:03):
So there's no need to havesomeone to oversee the work.
JILL FINLAYSON (05:07):
There must have been a need for middle managers.
Why don't we needthem now, or do we?
Are there pros andcons to flattening?
RON COVERSON (05:14):
What we saw in the early 2000s and beyond was that
they were experimenting inSilicon Valley and of course,
beyond, because what startsthere goes across the nation,
even across the globe.
When they began to experimentwith flattening the hierarchies,
they had lots of success, butthere were also some failures.
So where were the failures?
The failures were in the areaof the lack of self-management
(05:35):
within individual pods.
People were used tobeing directed or being
told what to do, how to doit, what the timelines were,
and they were justtaking in information,
and there was verylittle critical thinking.
So that was happening in thistransition that was occurring.
What began to happen is, asmiddle managers and supervisors
(05:55):
noticed that there wasa lot of creativity,
a lot of entrepreneurial ideas,a lot of things happening
in a kinetic fashion, but therewas not a lot of organization.
There was not alot of continuity
from one stage of a project tothe next stage and the following
stage.
So some of those experimentsfailed in the sense
that timelines weren'tmet, product getting
(06:17):
to market on time were delayed.
And so then there wasthe reevaluation of OK,
we don't want these overarchingcommand and control,
micromanaging hierarchiesand management people
and supervisors.
But how do we then,make sure that we
have a cohesive operationthat we can rely on,
that's going to getproduct to market,
or get the businesssolutions where
(06:39):
they need to be ina timely fashion,
so they could meetthe expectations
and demand of client groups?
So that's when theteam leader emerged.
And the teams becamemore performance teams
or project teams that areperformance management set
of requirements,objectives, and a threshold
that you can measure in termsof accomplishing those goals.
And so the supervisor wasno longer necessarily just
(07:02):
the person who wasdemanding things
to be done in a certain way.
She was now, acolleague, but a leader,
an expert in a certainway, and her role
was much more collaborative.
Her role was much moreinvolved in building trust,
as we'll talk about, I'm sure,in really creating a powerful,
synergistic team dynamic,which is a very different
(07:23):
responsibility than we would seein the '80s and '90s and even
early 2000s withsupervisors and managers.
JILL FINLAYSON (07:29):
Yeah, the team leader concept.
You have now, there's stilla little bit of a hierarchy,
right?
You have a team thatyou're working with,
but many times, they haveexpertise that you don't have,
but you're stillabove them in rank.
How does that work in terms ofif you're not their supervisor,
as it were, you'retheir team manager,
(07:50):
how do you overseepeople who have
expertise that you don't have?
RON COVERSON (07:54):
The role is a different role
because in the old sortof command and control,
directorial manager, supervisorresponsibility, the currency
of exchange was power.
So people wererather intimidated
because the perception wasthat person who was a manager
not only had alevel of expertise
that was, let's say,above most of the rank
(08:14):
and file-- if we cansay it that way--
in the group, inthe organization,
in the old school of the hat.
But that person also hadpower, and the concern
was they could reportthat you were either
meeting expectationsand performing
at a high level or you weren't,and that they were sort of that
go between, and wereinterpreting how the team was
(08:34):
doing, or how an individualwas doing as a narrative
to the C-suite, if you will.
And it undermines trust,and that's problematic.
And so instead of peoplefeeling like they're
empowered to getwork done and to use
their intelligence,their smarts,
their collaborativeabilities to share ideas,
to hold each otheraccountable as adults
in a new world of work,they were much more
(08:55):
inclined to be concernedabout their individual ability
to stay relevant inthe organization,
depending upon how themanager viewed them.
That's all changed.
Now, the supervisor is ateam member, a partner.
And to your point,Jill, certainly has
a level of expertise,but not necessarily more
than the team members,who, in a sense,
(09:17):
are in a flattened,horizontal dynamic.
And now, the team leader isresponsible for, let's say,
keeping the projectmoving on time,
taking a look at how themeasurements were going,
meeting with individualsand subgroups
within that team to makesure that even the subparts
of a project or an initiative ora series of business objectives
(09:39):
were being met.
And now that personis more of a coach,
a feedback loop,leader, if you will,
someone who is able tobuild trust at a high level,
and needs to be open to beingtold that things were not
working well, and they neededto work with the management
to crunch the project byadding another person,
(10:00):
taking a look atelongating the timeline,
looking at the criticalpath to make sure
that they were going to meetthe expectations, ultimately,
of what was expected in termsof the performance model
of the product or service.
And also that they weregoing to be trusted
to go to the seniormanagement team or the C-suite
was going to honestly andfairly and accurately represent
(10:21):
how things were going.
And so trust became the currencymuch more so than ever before.
And power, althoughit's there, there's
a differential now, becausewhen you're empowering people
to get work done, then trustis a facilitative mechanism
or energy that helps youto move forward in a way
where you're going toultimately get things done,
(10:43):
and people aregoing to trust you,
that if there has to besome tough decisions made,
that you're going to makedecisions that are in the best
interest of everybodyon the team, of course,
in alignment with theexpectations of the C-suite
or the senior manager.
JILL FINLAYSON (10:56):
So the world is less vertical, more horizontal.
If you are tryingto lead in this more
horizontal, flatworld, how do you
build this newcurrency of trust?
If you don't haveautomatic power,
how do you build the trustthat's the new currency?
RON COVERSON (11:14):
I think there's a respect with team members
because people areadult, and they
are expert in theirindividual contributors,
and they understandhow important it is
to get the project work done.
So inherently,you've got people who
are good at what they do,they're smart, they're capable,
they have certainly,team-building skills, hopefully.
That's part of therequisite competency list
(11:35):
that you're lookingfor when you're
hiring people in the newworld of work anyway,
along with what we callemotional intelligence,
the ability to work throughdifferences and conflict.
So inherently, you havepeople who respect a leader.
That's expected,that they would have
that respect for the leader.
But there also has to be anexpectation that leader is
(11:56):
a good listener, seeksto understand first,
and then to be understood later.
And that, that leaderwill facilitate
a credible relationshipby doing what
they say they'regoing to do, following
a collaborative process.
And that's what I mean bytrust becomes that currency.
So the credibility ofthe leader is much higher
because it isn't about power.
And that alsospeaks to the issue
(12:18):
that there's an expectationthat, that person is empowered
to do their job, and they'renot being micromanaged,
so that they can also model thisempowerment approach as they
supervise and leadothers in the team.
JILL FINLAYSON (12:29):
So if you're not a middle manager,
you're a team leader.
You actually havealmost a different skill
set that you need to developand different processes
to build those relationalconnections and the credibility?
You talk aboutcredibility, integrity.
How do people showthat they're credible?
I mean, that's not somethingthat you can just say,
(12:50):
"I'm credible."
RON COVERSON (12:51):
No.
No, you're right.
The business world todayis, what we used to call,
the show me state.
You've got to beable to perform.
And even if you're astrategist, as a team leader,
you've got to also be tactician.
You've got to model both.
Sometimes you have to beable to show someone exactly
the way something needsto happen or get done.
You can't just say,"We'll figure it out."
(13:13):
So you've got, credibilitycomes from modeling, Jill.
Credibility comesfrom keeping your word
or saying, "I need tomeet again with you all
because I'm not going to beable to get that done on time.
And I do apologize, butI was hoping to do it,
but I wanted to at least betransparent and talk to you
about that."
So being honest,open, and transparent
is a quality of trust building.
But one of the things thatI've introduced in classes
(13:34):
and in some of the workI've done in leading teams
is to talk about, howdo we define trust?
What's a simple,straightforward way
of actually articulating howtrust performs or is activated
in the real world?
And so I have a formulathat looks like this.
There's a numeratorand a denominator.
In the numerator, there'sthe credibility factor,
which we'll come back totalking about in a moment.
(13:55):
And when you addrapport to that,
which is the relationalpiece, you've
got what you mainly needto move forward effectively
in your efforts to build trustwith individuals and groups.
When we say credibility, wedon't just mean expertise.
We don't just mean doing whatyou say you're going to do.
We're talking about the waythat you show up relationally,
(14:16):
and we're talkingabout the way that you
help get things done byrolling up your sleeves,
by participating with the team,by collaborating effectively
with them.
So that when they thinkabout you as a leader,
they not just think about youin terms of your leadership
responsibility, but theyalso think about you
as a full member of the team,that you're participating fully.
You have everyone's notonly best interest in mind,
(14:39):
you have, what wecall, skin in the game.
You really see this as notwhat they're responsible to,
but what we are responsible to.
So you move from a"they" to a "we" thing.
And those are the thingsthat facilitate trust.
Now, I talked about thenumerator, the credibility
plus rapport.
But on the denominator,we have risk.
So in every single engagement,Jill, with every single project,
(14:59):
there's something at risk.
There's what's at riskfor the client groups.
There's what's at riskfor the senior management
team or the C-suite.
There's what's at riskfor every participant
on the team orcross-functional team,
because oftentimes, thereare cross-functional
responsibilities to getthings done between,
let's say, IT and marketing,or between HR and finance,
(15:22):
in terms of budgetary pieces.
So there are all thesedynamics happening,
so everybody has risk.
So one of thethings that you want
to do when you're thinkingabout building trust
with an individual isto think about what's
that risk for themto participate
in a way that's goingto be meaningful
for them and for all of us?
And then when you lookat the team dynamic,
because there's certainlya performance element,
(15:43):
and the team is goingto be looked at as well,
and people want the bestpossible outcome of how
the team is viewed before thenext project comes up, at least.
So I talk about what'sat risk for people?
In the classroom, we actuallyhave fun exercises and case
studies where we look at, whatwas that risk for so-and-so?
What was that risk in terms ofthis currency of trust process
(16:03):
for the senior managementteam to empower
a team within theorganizational structure
to get an importantinitiative off the ground
and ultimately, either handit off or accomplished?
So it's reallyimportant to think
about what's at risk forpeople, and to recognize
that if there's a higher risk,you need more credibility.
And if there's a higherrisk, you need more rapport.
(16:25):
So that requirestime with people.
And ultimately,business is always
going to be relational,even in the new world of AI.
JILL FINLAYSON: What do you think (16:31):
undefined
your students were mostsurprised by in doing
these activities?
And thinking about changingtheir team management style,
what surprised them the most?
RON COVERSON (16:41):
I think there were several things, Jill.
One is that because we do alot of our exercises in teams,
there are three in severalclasses, major projects that
are done in teams, so one ofthe things that they learned
or realized, whetherthey were currently
functioning on aregular basis in a team
or whether it was a relativelynew construct for them
(17:04):
or idea of businessfunction in the work world,
was that they had to makesure their communication
skills and their approachto how they listened
and how they communicatedwith their team members
to really come up with thebest options to solve a case
or address a case,was up to par.
And they would come back withfeedback and say, I realized,
I'm not really listeningto my team that well.
(17:26):
And they would actually confessthat in the middle of a larger
class review of thebreakout sessions, and say,
"I've got to listen betterto Bob and Suzanne in order
to understand how they view thecomplications of solving this
case issue or meeting theexpectation of this case."
And the other thing thatthey would often say
is that, "I'm moreof an introvert.
(17:47):
I'm not really an extrovert,so I prefer not to really talk
as much," or "I'lltake on an assignment,
but I don't necessarily want topartner with a bunch of people
to do that assignment, sojust the whole team dynamic is
a little weird for me."
So, we would ask peopleto go away and do
some self-examination aboutwhat your work style is, so
that other people can bestunderstand how you work best
(18:08):
so they can adjust andadapt to your work style.
So we use a modelcalled D-I-S-C--
DISC-- which I think ispretty familiar in most
of the market places ofleast, the US, if not abroad.
And that allows people toplay around with work style
differentials, and start tobegin to think about how can I
be a better team memberto Bob and Lamar,
(18:28):
who have a very differentapproach to the work than I do?
JILL FINLAYSON (18:31):
Empowering is kind of a two-way street,
though.
It isn't just the teammanager or team leader.
It's the person on the team.
So how do you seeempowerment and how do you
make it work mosteffectively as you're guiding
students in this process?
RON COVERSON (18:47):
So one of the amazing things about UC
Berkeley's performancemanagement model--
it's the best I've ever seen--
it's really about mutuality.
It's really about growingtogether in the workplace.
It's really about negotiatingwith another person or a team
to establish ground rules andobjectives for how they're
going to work together throughthe course of the year,
(19:09):
and to establish goalsalong those same lines.
And so some of those goalswould be individual goals
for that person to meetfor the sake of the team
and their supervisor.
And some of those goalsare team-oriented goals
that would even include themanager to be a part of it.
And that should bearticulated in the goal.
And then, ultimately,an individual's success
(19:30):
should be characterizedby the team's success.
So a supervisor that'sfollowing this model--
This Achieve Together model,that's what it's called.
It's very mutualistic--needs to make sure
that they are takingresponsibility
for facilitating an equitable,fair, just, and clearly metriced
(19:51):
set of goals.
And one of those goals shouldbe a developmental goal
for that person.
And to me, theseare the things that
sort of representand characterize
what mutuality is all about.
It's not about a top-down thing.
It's not about what you have todo for me as your supervisor.
It's about us, and how we getthis done together, how we
achieve these goals together.
JILL FINLAYSON (20:11):
I like this work as a conversation
and kind of bringing it upa level, making sure people
understand the shared visionand how their role fits
into that team goal.
What happens when a teammember isn't measuring up,
isn't pulling their weight?
What does the conversationlook like then?
RON COVERSON (20:29):
I think it starts with the initial relationship
at the beginning of theyear, the Achieve Together
conversation.
And it starts there,where you make agreements.
"Claudia, I justwant you to know
that there are going to be timeswhen you may disagree with me,
and I just want to make surethat we can disagree and not
be disagreeable.
And there are going to betimes when, most of the time,
(20:51):
there's going to be ideascoming from you and others,
and I'm going to say that's abetter idea than the ones we
came up with before, orthe one that I thought
was the best approach,the best way forward.
And then there aregoing to be times
when I need to makean executive decision,
because that's myresponsibility,
and I've listened enough,and I've heard from people,
and I've heard fromour client groups,
and I've heard from oursenior management team,
and now, we've got to moveforward with this decision.
(21:11):
All I'm asking isthat, at some point,
the conversationstops, and you're
doing what you'resupposed to do,
and we move forward together.
The flip side of that is that ifyou're not meeting expectations,
then we have to havethose conversations.
And my approach isgoing to be initially,
what's getting in the way?
What obstacles arethere that I can remove?
Is there trainingin intermediate,
(21:33):
an Excel sheet work so that--
Excel spreadsheetthat you're working on
can be more accurateand more reliable?
What is it thatyou need from me?
And ultimately, here's whatyou're responsible for."
So what I believe isthat every individual
has to take responsibilityfor their contributions
to challenges or problems thatthey may be either inadvertently
or just unconsciouslyparticipating in.
(21:57):
And that could be a lot ofundermining of what they think
should be done in the project.
That could be notbeing respectful
of others, acollaborative sense.
The emotional intelligencepiece, Jill, as you well know,
is a huge factor inevaluating performance.
And that includes all thefactors we're talking about,
but also your communicationskills, your listening skills,
(22:17):
your ability to be acollaborator and a good partner.
When I have a verydifficult situation,
I will call thatperson into my office,
and I'll have, whatI call, Jill, the you
and you conversation.
And what that means is thatI will take a look at--
Let's say, the person'sbeen here for 18 months--
I'll take a look at backto the day we hired John,
and how we were so excited, andhow we agreed on the objectives
(22:40):
back 18 monthsago, and we agreed
on how we'd go aboutdoing the work,
and we agreed that everyaspect of the job description
was what he agreed towas the expectation.
And I would say to him, "We'vehad several conversations over
the last nine months, and whatwe've seen, what I've seen--
when I say we, the team--
in terms of theagreements we all
(23:01):
made about everyindividual responsibility
and the contributionsthat we're making
to the success or thefailure of this project,
is that things havenot gone well with you.
It's a puzzle tome because we've
tried a lot of differentthings to address it.
So it's Friday afternoon.
You're who you are today,John, and you're not the person
that you were 18 monthsago when you signed up.
(23:22):
So I would like foryou to go home today
and through the weekendand look in the mirror
and have a conversation withthe you that took the job
and agreed to the objectives,and agreed to the job
description, and agreed to workwell with the team and with me.
It's not an issuebetween you and me.
It's not an issue betweenyou and the law school
or the business team thatyou happen to be working on.
(23:42):
It's you and you.
The you that signed upfor the role 18 months ago
and you today.
When you work thatout, let me know.
And if you need somehelp around that,
because we've gota lot of resources,
happy to help you with that.
But you need to comeback in the coming
week or two with a newapproach to what we're doing.
I'm looking for theJohn that started
(24:03):
with us in the fall of2023, not the John that's
here in front of me today.
So I need you and youto go work that out."
JILL FINLAYSON (24:10):
I like that you and you approach,
because it's very empoweringin a way to the person who
maybe isn't feeling agood fit at the moment.
And it's allowingthem to go reflect,
is this the right place?
Am I making the effort?
Am I that personwho took the job,
and what's changed since then?
If we want to takeit up a level,
I think, another thing, justsort on the macro level,
(24:30):
people are thinking aboutis if the hierarchy is flat,
how do I advance in my career?
There's no up to go to.
Can you tell us what weshould be thinking about?
RON COVERSON (24:42):
I really think some of the best conversations
that a supervisor canhave, and I've certainly
had with employees, andalso as an HR professional
with my directreports, is to help
them think about their career.
And it still is one ofthose conversations, Jill,
where we're asking themto own their career.
We can help from afacilitative standpoint,
from a chaperoning standpoint toguide and to dialogue and offer
(25:04):
recommendations.
But ultimately, everybodyhas to take responsibility
for their own career, for theirown success track, if you will.
We talk about that, andwe talk about owning
that, and that your supervisorand maybe someone in HR
can help you figure thatout better and create
a roadmap for that.
JILL FINLAYSON (25:20):
In a way, this is like the middle management
conversation.
Your job may not beup, it may be over,
or it may be diagonalbecause you're
changing teams or changingcompanies or even changing role
to advance.
But that's kind ofhard to do if you
don't know what those rolesare, or what you're equipped
to move diagonally into.
RON COVERSON (25:41):
Yeah.
And I think it'sa responsibility
of talent managementorganizations and HR
teams as a whole within schoolsand units or in the capital
market spaces to beavailable to help people
to either through thewebsite or other means
or consultation to take a lookat what are the options, what
are the possibilities here?
Because once again,retention should
(26:01):
be a goal of HR organizations,to encourage people to stay.
But not at the expenseof-- and to grow-- but not
the expense of their owncareer and vocational goals
and interests.
Because ultimately, if we arethe masters of their fate,
so to speak, then now, we'reback into a command and control
kind of thing, as opposedto empowering people
(26:22):
to be adult andtake responsibility
for their life, their career,and their vocational interests.
JILL FINLAYSON: There's a lot of data. (26:27):
undefined
Also says people don't wantto become people managers.
They want to advancein their career,
but they want to stay anindividual contributor.
So I was going to ask you,why you think that's the case,
and what are theoptions or alternative
paths for advancementif you want to remain
an independent contributor?
RON COVERSON (26:46):
Yeah, I still think,
even though it's something Ienjoy, being a people manager,
and I really don't like theterm people manager as much
as I like the phrase peopleleader or a leader of others,
because it's more reflectiveof what I've been describing
about the modelingaspect of a leader
or a supervisoror a team leader,
as we've been describing, Jill.
I've had conversations, as Ithink about the many years I've
(27:09):
been doing this, with managersand supervisors who've
come to me and said, "Ron,how do I stop being a manager?
I make good money.
I need to keep making thesame money I'm making,
but how do I move out?"
And I'll often say,"You're this level manager,
but you could be a P5.
You could be a professionalat the five level.
The salary scaleis commensurate,
(27:29):
and you've certainly earned itover the years you've been here.
And it's not going to bean easy outworking of it,
but I think theuniversity and the team
and the leadership herewould want to retain you.
So let's start havingthat conversation
with your supervisorand with others so
that we can look at the prospectof things changing for you
(27:50):
and where you start to unwind.
Your responsibilitymight take six months,
but you unwind yourresponsibility as a supervisor
and go back to being anindividual contributor."
Again, Jill, I've heardthat conversation more
in the past few years than I'dsay, five or 10 years prior.
And that's becauseit's really difficult,
A, managing or leading people ingeneral, and in a flatter world,
(28:11):
where, again, thedifferential is not power,
but the currency istrust, then that's
a much more difficultdynamic to facilitate.
And the skill set isvery different skill
set than you would needif you were in a power
kind of differentialcommand and control
role, which again, is, forthe most part, disappearing.
JILL FINLAYSON (28:32):
So if people are kind
of skirting aroundor moving around,
what does this mean forinstitutional memory?
What does this mean forsuccession planning?
RON COVERSON (28:40):
I'm a big believer in apprenticeship.
I know that it seems likean old world, 19th century,
turn of phrase, but I'm justreally a big believer in when
you assign a person to lead aproject or to have a certain set
of responsibilities, it's areally good idea to join them
with somebody else who has asimilar group of skill sets,
(29:03):
maybe working in a slightlydifferent subteam role,
but they can really addvalue to that person.
And also, theconversation should
be, to lead that, let's say,team leader in that context--
Let's say I'm overseeinga group of professionals
in several projects,several HR projects, really,
more as a coach and a consultantthan anything, and a strategist.
(29:26):
And I'll go to thatperson and say, "Margaret,
I just really think thatHomer is a great candidate
to be an assistant to Inthis important project,
because Homer has alot of AI background,
and we're talking about thistransition in this area of HR.
And I just would loveyou to work with him,
and also for you to share alot of the things about this
(29:47):
business and this area or thisparticular functionality."
And what I'll tell people islike, you can't be worried
about someone elsein a collaborative,
flatter construct being seenas better or more capable
than you are.
You're responsiblefor who you are.
You can create, design, andrepresent your own talent value
(30:10):
proposition.
I'm happy to help youfigure out that formula.
It's not complicated, and youshould be confident about that.
And just know that we're goingto play, as you said, Jill,
different roles anddifferent times.
Even in my executive capacity,I may play an entirely different
role in a certainseason, because whatever
the project or the initiativeor the objective requires.
(30:30):
Ego has to be-- talkabout flattening.
You have to flattenthat ego and be
willing to make adjustmentsand partner with other people
to get things done right,because ultimately,
that's what's themost important thing.
It's not about the individual,it's about the team.
So I like the idea of having anapprentice in certain scenarios.
So that if that person leaves,and they have the choice
to do that, thatlead person, you
(30:50):
have someone who has someinstitutional memory, knowledge,
and ability to takeon the project,
at least on an interimbasis, if that makes sense.
JILL FINLAYSON: What I really like (30:58):
undefined
about theapprenticeship model is
it's also unlocking thepathway to advancement.
You may not have thoughtabout this route,
but if you're giventhat opportunity,
it's going to open new doors, orjust make visible roles that you
might not have otherwise seen.
RON COVERSON (31:13):
That's exactly right.
And that goes on your resume.
I helped so and so, theirtitle, and this big project,
and I was able to help themin certain critical areas
to perform certain tasks,and have responsibility
in that area.
So you're actually leveling upwhen you're getting to do that.
One of the things--this thought came
(31:33):
to mind-- that I enjoyeddoing is challenging people
to present.
Instead of mepresenting a project,
process, or to provide afacilitation on where we're
at in terms of our planningand the metric and so on,
the measurement, I'll askother people to do that
or to co-facilitate.
And I've had people say,"Oh, I'm terrible as a public
(31:54):
speaker."
And I say, "Well, we're here.
It's a us thing,but, why don't you
take on at least thefirst 10 minutes, and talk
about these things,and you can even
solicit some of the rest ofus to share as subject matter
experts, around the table.
We'll be ready for that.
But I want you to lead becauseI want you to challenge yourself
to be in these situations.
Because ultimately, basedupon where you want to go,
(32:14):
that's going to be presenting infront of lots of people is going
to be part of what you're goingto need to be able to develop
a competency in."
JILL FINLAYSON: I absolutely love (32:20):
undefined
giving peoplestretch assignments,
giving themcommunication skills,
and that actually leadsme to talk about this.
You said you have to flattenyour ego to get things done,
but you also have tocommunicate with other teams
to get things done.
I don't feel like thingshappen in silos anymore.
So as you talk about thrivingin this flatter world,
(32:42):
what are somespecific strategies
for improving your communicationand cross-functional,
multidisciplinary skills tointeract with other teams
effectively?
RON COVERSON (32:52):
Yeah.
So I teach two courses, inparticular, on communication.
One is, literally,speaking and writing.
It's the fundamentalsof communication
in a new world of work, whichI'll come back to describing
a little bit more.
And the other is thestrategic communication piece
for managers,organizational-related
communication, whichhas several levels,
(33:13):
and is matrixedin a lot of ways.
And that particular course isfilled with real-world case
studies from real-worldorganizations and university
stories.
Of course, in some cases,the names have been redacted,
but a lot of other cases withthese capital market companies,
the names are there, becauseit was publicly known.
I say that to letpeople know that you
(33:34):
have to start with fundamentalcommunication abilities,
in terms of writingand speaking.
And as you know,Jill, writing an email
is very different than a DM,a chat, or even a phone call.
And you have to thinkabout your audience
no matter what the scenariois, what the writing task is,
whether it's a proposal, anemail follow-up, an update
(33:56):
on how the team is doing, howyou're doing on a project,
or it's just a short, chat,question kind of communication.
On the other side,you have to always
make sure people areperceiving you as professional,
as logical, as ordered in yourexplanation or your proposition,
and as making arequest in a clear way
so somebody canactually respond to it.
(34:17):
And you have to be able totake the time to do that.
So in our writingand speaking course,
we start on a very basic levelusing the different types
of media for ourcommunication, including Zoom,
and how you show upin those settings,
and that you develop those skillsets to do that effectively.
Then, there's also speaking.
They're speaking inthe public setting.
They're speakingin a Zoom scenario.
(34:38):
They're speaking to a group,a small group in a conference
room.
What are theimportant qualities?
Are you pithy?
Are you concise?
Do you stay on point?
How do you answer questions?
Are you honest in saying, "Idon't have an answer to that,
but I will get back toyou within the next day,
so thank you, and I'mgoing to write that down,
or flip chart that, or putthat on the whiteboard."
All these things reflectyour professionalism,
(35:00):
your credibility, yourintegrity, and writing
and speaking are two of themost important elements that
are never going to go away,that reflect your ability
to engender confidencein the people that
are asking you to get thingsdone in a certain role.
The communicationpiece, the ability
to collaborateeffectively, to continue
to improve yourcommunication skills,
(35:22):
to even take a courseon voice and diction--
A course, I took inmy undergraduate--
is going to make all thedifference in the world.
JILL FINLAYSON (35:29):
It's really challenging because there are,
what I would call,so many tech stacks.
You mentioned Zoom and Gmailand texting and messaging.
But there's also Slack andNotion and Asana and Jira
and all of these projectmanagement tools.
Does the same voice or tonework for all of these platforms?
What are the problems thatyou've seen people have,
(35:52):
and how do you help themto not have those kind
of misunderstandings?
RON COVERSON (35:56):
You've got to be able to know your audience
and what their expectations are.
If they're a group of ITprofessionals, software
engineers, they're going to havea different set of expectations
for the presentationor what you're
writing to them than, let'ssay, an audience of marketing
professionals or an audience ofeven HR professionals, right?
So you've got toknow your audience.
(36:16):
And if it's a diverse audience,cross-functional audience,
then you've got totry to write or speak
to the areas that areimportant to each group
to the best of your ability.
But it starts there.
And I find that especially withvery smart people who really
respect data and research,it's really important
(36:37):
to do research,do your homework.
So if you're bringing a proposalto bear either in PowerPoint
slides, in a presentationon Zoom, Jill, or in person
in a conference room, or you'rewriting a proposal in Word,
or let's say, in an email--
I think it's probablybetter to have
an introduction in the emailand then attach a Word document,
or attach it to a GoogleDoc, that people can actually
(37:01):
even comment on--
you have to do your homework,and footnote the research
and data points, because itbrings an objective credibility
to what you're tryingto get across to people,
to help-- to educate them, tohelp them understand things,
or to recommend adifferent course of action.
Opinions, we all have them.
But when you haveobjective data,
(37:22):
you have evidence, you havecase study with a brief on how
it worked out, that bringsa level of expertise that
is impressive to an audience.
And I recommend that.
So you really have toknow your audience,
understand whether it's going tobe a long or short presentation
or communication.
If it's writing, be brief,concise, and to the point.
As one writer saidmany years ago,
(37:44):
"Brevity is the soul of wit."
I think that was Shakespeare.
So you really just need to beconscientious of those things,
and just make sure that you'reshowing up professionally
in whatever manner ofcommunication that you represent
that day or for that occasion.
JILL FINLAYSON (37:57):
So this applies to both leaders, as well as
individual contributors.
Everybody needs these skills.
If you're anindividual contributor
and your manager goesaway, what should you
expect will happen to your role?
How will things change?
Are there other skills youneed besides good communication
skills when that happens?
RON COVERSON (38:18):
That's a good case study because that does happen.
And if I'm, let's say,a strategic director
in a division, andthere's a manager,
and there are teamleaders, the first thing
I want to say to that manageris, "Carl, I want to make sure
that if you go ona long vacation
or hopefully, you staywith us for a long time,
(38:40):
you move forward withanother opportunity,
I want to make sure thatBarbara and Jill are
ready to, at leaston an interim basis,
take on the responsibilitiesthat you hold currently.
So what are you going to do tomake sure that they're ready,
just in case you need totake a long vacation?"
Because I think that's oneof the responsibilities
(39:00):
of a leader.
When I was at Levimany years ago, Jill,
I was part of an elaborateleadership training program that
went on for severalmonths, and it
was just amazing set oflearning technologies that we
were using to develop leaders.
And one of the things we had todo was we had to write a memoir
saying that I'm going to begone on a sabbatical for three
months.
Is my team ready to takeon the responsibilities
(39:23):
of interim co-management orco-leadership in my absence?
What does that look like?
And I'll tell you, there werea lot of eyes glazing over
when that assignmentwas given out
in that particularset of workshops,
because most of themanagers or leaders
were not ready towrite that memoir
in an honest, open, andtransparent way, which was
part of the requirement, right?
(39:44):
Because you're going to getfeedback from consultants
to help you on that.
So I think that should be partof what a division leader, let's
just call it for the sake oflooking at a matrix organization
or dean of a law school orthe dean of a business school,
or the vice chancellor offundraising, or whomever,
should require that, and workwith the HR leadership team
(40:04):
to make sure thatthat's part of what's
expected in the performancemanagement process.
JILL FINLAYSON (40:09):
So I have a question.
Statistically, middle managers,at this point in time,
are 30% more likelyto be laid off.
If you are, what would be,considered a middle manager,
what should you doto make yourself
valuable, irreplaceable?
Should you be pivoting?
Should you berepositioning yourself?
Because it seems like a prettyscary time for middle managers.
RON COVERSON (40:31):
I think that's right.
It's always goingto be that way.
My first answer tothat question, Jill,
is everybody, whether you're amiddle manager or supervisor,
individual contributor,but let's talk specifically
about a middle manager, atall times and in all places,
you should never be satisfiedwith where you're at.
You should never be complacent.
You should take a look atwhat is the market requiring
(40:52):
of 0 person in thisrole in the future,
or someone that's a teamleader, or a supervisor?
Where do I need to upskill?
Do I need to get my master's?
And I'm not justsaying get a master's
for the sake of getting amaster's, but maybe there's
a credential in management orin leadership in the Extension
program.
In a very economically,doable way,
I can get certificateprogram done.
(41:13):
Also in HR, they have a reallygreat certificate program there,
and in other areas.
And I just think, nowadays, justhaving that experience in that
and working with teams inthose learning environments,
having cohorts through thecourse of a 10-week course,
you're just going to be able todevelop all kinds of new skills,
new approaches, different waysof working with other people,
(41:36):
because a lot of workgets done in teams.
And as I mentioned before, inthe cases that we use, and most
of my instructor colleaguesdo the same thing,
have the same similar model,and ultimately, you're
going to look back and say, thatwas a very worthwhile 10 weeks.
I'm going to keep doingthis and be upskilled.
So that you may not be amanager next time around,
but if you are, you're goingto be a much better manager
(41:57):
than you were before,because you were not stilted,
you're not complacent.
I have this model, and Ilearned it from my younger days
of being an athlete andalso working with artists,
is that you got toget better every day.
And what I noticed aboutathletes and others,
about artists, in general, isthat they're always rehearsing.
They're always practicing.
They're always upskilling.
(42:17):
They want to getbetter every day.
They're never satisfiedwith where they are.
They want to maximizetheir capabilities,
and that's an attitude ofthe mind and the heart.
And I think that ifyou're a middle manager,
you need to do a littlebit of introspection
before you get laid off sothat you're ready for that.
It's never easy.
I've been laid off in my career.
It's never easy.
(42:38):
I always try to lookat the glass half full.
OK, what's theopportunity ahead of me,
and what do I need to do to getready for that next opportunity?
JILL FINLAYSON (42:44):
And all of this flattening
is causing a lot of change,which causes anxiety and stress.
So do you have any finalwords of advice of how,
whether you're aboss, team leader,
or an individualcontributor, how
should you be thinkingabout the future of work
differently because of thisflat world that we're in?
RON COVERSON (43:04):
I just think you have to look at the--
become a glass half full person.
I'm not saying have apersonality transformation
or change.
But I like the story,Christopher Robin's story,
the Hundred Acre Woods.
Most people tend tobe Eeyore's, "Oh, no,
the world is comingto an end, and AI is
going to take over the world.
(43:24):
It's "The Matrix," in reality."
And then there are a lot ofother people who are Tiggers.
They just bounce.
I'm not saying wehave to be either
or, but I think itwould be a good idea
to do some personal work.
I'm a big believer in therapyand coaching and feedback.
Get a coach.
Have an honest, transparent,and confidential relationship
with that person.
Whatever you're paying,it's worthwhile.
(43:46):
Get the feedback and startworking in those areas,
and be honest with yourself.
Just really be superhonest with yourself.
Have a reality check, butnever lose confidence.
I'll tell you a quickstory to wrap this up.
When I was a sophomore inhigh school, I went through,
I think, what teenagerstend to go through,
just a real seasonof depression.
(44:06):
And I wouldn't sayit was full-fledged,
but I was just really,"You're not good at anything.
You keep failing at this.
You get an A here and a C there.
You're just kind of not reallywell-versed in anything that you
can hang your hat on, Ron."
And I remember walking acrossthe high school campus,
and it was one of those momentsof fate, and I believe in that.
(44:26):
And an old friend ofmine, Lenny Darden--
Lenny, if you ever see thispodcast, this is for you--
he walks up to me, because heand I were on the newspaper
staff in our middleschool, and we also
were on the yearbookstaff together.
And Lenny said,"Ron, come with me."
And I said, "No, I'm notgoing anywhere with you."
And he said, "Come with meto the journalism department,
because you're anamazing writer,
(44:48):
and we need someone like youbecause we don't have that great
a group of writers."
And I said-- Imean, he dragged me,
Jill, to thejournalism department.
The year later, I becamethe associate editor
of that newspaper.
The year after that,I became the editor
of that newspaper, the onlyhigh school daily newspaper
in the country.
And it changed my life, right?
(45:08):
So when you find outwhat you do best,
and you have confidencein those things,
don't let anybody tell youwhat you can or cannot do.
You figure out thatout for yourself.
You have confidence.
You determine that.
You have good friends who giveyou good, confidential feedback.
Encouragement is the bestthing to do with people that
are struggling in that way.
And ultimately, do somehomework, do some work,
and go to the next level.
(45:29):
But never be satisfiedwith where you are.
JILL FINLAYSON (45:31):
Thank you, Ron.
I love going to the next level.
And I love the fact thatpeople can see the flattening
as actually expandingopportunities,
because now they're notlimited to the structure
and the step-by-stepladder that you
had to climb forhierarchy in the past.
Now, you can almost chart yourown path and go diagonally
and go horizontally,rather than having
(45:52):
to just have a veryprescribed, vertical path.
RON COVERSON (45:55):
Thank you, Jill.
I've really enjoyedthis conversation.
Thank you so much forinviting me into it.
JILL FINLAYSON: Thank you so much. (46:00):
undefined
And with that, I hopeyou enjoyed this latest
in a long series ofpodcasts that we'll be
sending your way every month.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
Please share withfriends and colleagues
who may be interested in takingthis Future of Work journey
with us.
And make sure to check outextension.berkeley.edu,
to find a varietyof courses to help
you thrive in this newworking flat landscape.
(46:21):
And to see what's comingup at EDGE in Tech,
go ahead and visitedge.berkeley.edu.
Thanks so much forlistening, and we'll
be back next month tocontinue our discussions
on the Future of Work.
The Future of Work Podcastis hosted by Jill Finlayson,
produced by Sarah Benzuly,edited by Matt Dipietro, Natalie
Newman, and Alicia Liao.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
(00:02):
RON COVERSON (00:06):
You don't need overseers.
You don't need people to,frankly, provide a command
and control kind of directionalapproach to management.
You've got amazingly smart,capable individual contributors
who are somewhatentrepreneurial.
They prefer topartner with others,
to collaborate with others, toshare ideas, to be creative,
(00:28):
to provoke, and innovation.
JILL FINLAYSON (00:32):
Welcome to the Future of Work Podcast,
with Berkeley Extensionand EDGE in Tech
at the University ofCalifornia, focused
on expanding diversityand gender equity in tech.
EDGE in Tech is part of theInnovation Hub at CITRIS--
the Center for ITResearch in the Interest
of Society-- and theBanatao Institute.
UC Berkeley Extension isthe continuing education arm
of UC Berkeley.
(00:53):
In this episode, we're divinginto the critical transformation
happening across industries, thedecline of middle management.
As companies flattentheir structures
in pursuit ofefficiency, what happens
to organizational communication?
Workplace culture?
Are we losing vitalconnectors who
bridge leadership and employees,or is this the evolution
(01:16):
of a more agile andcollaborative workforce?
To talk about thisimportant topic,
we're delighted towelcome Ron Coverson.
Ron is an executive-levelhuman resources professional
and business consultant,and is currently
the Assistant Dean of theAcademic Personnel and Human
Resources for the University ofCalifornia, Berkeley Law School.
Ron is experienced asan executive director
(01:37):
of human resources, training,and organizational development,
and as an instructor, curriculumdesigner, strategic planner,
and businessdevelopment manager.
Ron's employers have included UCBerkeley, Stanford University,
the America's Cup EventAuthority, the McKesson
Corporation, and LeviStrauss & Company.
For the past 10 years,Ron has partnered
with senior and middlemanagers, focusing
(01:59):
on leadership development,strategic planning, culture
change, talent, andperformance management.
He's also an esteemed instructorat the University of California
Berkeley Extension.
Welcome, Ron.
RON COVERSON (02:10):
Thank you, Jill.
It's a pleasure to be here.
Thanks for having me today.
JILL FINLAYSON (02:15):
This is such a great topic
to talk aboutbecause everybody's
noticing a lot ofchange happening
in the privatesector in particular,
but across the board, inorganizations, certainly
in government atthis moment in time.
So what does it mean when we sayorganizations are flattening?
RON COVERSON (02:31):
What it means is we're going through,
I would say, justanother transformation,
from the early stages of thetechnology revolution that
occurred in the '80sand particularly
in the '90s, and let's just say,at the beginning of the 21st
century, into another levelof industrial transformation
in the technology sense.
(02:51):
Meaning, AI is anunavoidable reality.
It is the next level, thenext so-called dimension,
of technological evolution.
And the most significantchanges we've seen,
that will create somechallenges for professionals
and for leadership andmanagers, but also,
offers an amazingarray of opportunities
(03:13):
for high-level efficiencies andsolving problems in a much more
dynamic and fastway, if you will,
in allowing people to reallypursue their approaches
to building organizationsmore relationally
in a way that givesthem the time to do so.
And that's, Ithink, part of what
we'll be talking about today.
JILL FINLAYSON (03:32):
Yeah, I'm looking forward to digging
into that relational piece.
But as we thinkabout-- like when
I think about anorganizational structure,
I think of thatpyramid, where you've
got one person at the top, thentwo people, then eight people,
and so forth, downthis big triangle.
Why is that organizationalstructure changing?
You said AI was one reason,but why would AI change that?
(03:53):
Why would that cut out a layer?
RON COVERSON (03:55):
Well, I think the layer cutting out will continue,
but it began really,in the 1980s.
I'm a bit of a historian, andif you look at what happened
in the 1980s, it was thebeginning of the elimination
of the middle manager, becausewe were on the cusp of this
amazing transition fromthe industrial age,
which was continuing through the'60s and '70s even to a certain
(04:17):
extent, although Silicon Valleywas emerging at that time.
And eventually, we realizedthat work gets done in teams,
and that was much more so in thelate '80s and the '90s, and you
don't need overseers.
You don't need people to,frankly, provide a command
and control kind of directionalapproach to management.
(04:41):
You've got amazingly smart,capable individual contributors
who are somewhatentrepreneurial.
They prefer topartner with others,
to collaborate withothers, to share ideas,
to be creative, toprovoke an innovation,
and to initiate actions more inthe context of a project process
with collaboratively-oriented,really smart people, Jill.
(05:03):
So there's no need to havesomeone to oversee the work.
JILL FINLAYSON (05:07):
There must have been a need for middle managers.
Why don't we needthem now, or do we?
Are there pros andcons to flattening?
RON COVERSON (05:14):
What we saw in the early 2000s and beyond was that
they were experimenting inSilicon Valley and of course,
beyond, because what startsthere goes across the nation,
even across the globe.
When they began to experimentwith flattening the hierarchies,
they had lots of success, butthere were also some failures.
So where were the failures?
The failures were in the areaof the lack of self-management
(05:35):
within individual pods.
People were used tobeing directed or being
told what to do, how to doit, what the timelines were,
and they were justtaking in information,
and there was verylittle critical thinking.
So that was happening in thistransition that was occurring.
What began to happen is, asmiddle managers and supervisors
(05:55):
noticed that there wasa lot of creativity,
a lot of entrepreneurial ideas,a lot of things happening
in a kinetic fashion, but therewas not a lot of organization.
There was not alot of continuity
from one stage of a project tothe next stage and the following
stage.
So some of those experimentsfailed in the sense
that timelines weren'tmet, product getting
(06:17):
to market on time were delayed.
And so then there wasthe reevaluation of OK,
we don't want these overarchingcommand and control,
micromanaging hierarchiesand management people
and supervisors.
But how do we then,make sure that we
have a cohesive operationthat we can rely on,
that's going to getproduct to market,
or get the businesssolutions where
(06:39):
they need to be ina timely fashion,
so they could meetthe expectations
and demand of client groups?
So that's when theteam leader emerged.
And the teams becamemore performance teams
or project teams that areperformance management set
of requirements,objectives, and a threshold
that you can measure in termsof accomplishing those goals.
And so the supervisor wasno longer necessarily just
(07:02):
the person who wasdemanding things
to be done in a certain way.
She was now, acolleague, but a leader,
an expert in a certainway, and her role
was much more collaborative.
Her role was much moreinvolved in building trust,
as we'll talk about, I'm sure,in really creating a powerful,
synergistic team dynamic,which is a very different
(07:23):
responsibility than we would seein the '80s and '90s and even
early 2000s withsupervisors and managers.
JILL FINLAYSON (07:29):
Yeah, the team leader concept.
You have now, there's stilla little bit of a hierarchy,
right?
You have a team thatyou're working with,
but many times, they haveexpertise that you don't have,
but you're stillabove them in rank.
How does that work in terms ofif you're not their supervisor,
as it were, you'retheir team manager,
(07:50):
how do you overseepeople who have
expertise that you don't have?
RON COVERSON (07:54):
The role is a different role
because in the old sortof command and control,
directorial manager, supervisorresponsibility, the currency
of exchange was power.
So people wererather intimidated
because the perception wasthat person who was a manager
not only had alevel of expertise
that was, let's say,above most of the rank
(08:14):
and file-- if we cansay it that way--
in the group, inthe organization,
in the old school of the hat.
But that person also hadpower, and the concern
was they could reportthat you were either
meeting expectationsand performing
at a high level or you weren't,and that they were sort of that
go between, and wereinterpreting how the team was
(08:34):
doing, or how an individualwas doing as a narrative
to the C-suite, if you will.
And it undermines trust,and that's problematic.
And so instead of peoplefeeling like they're
empowered to getwork done and to use
their intelligence,their smarts,
their collaborativeabilities to share ideas,
to hold each otheraccountable as adults
in a new world of work,they were much more
(08:55):
inclined to be concernedabout their individual ability
to stay relevant inthe organization,
depending upon how themanager viewed them.
That's all changed.
Now, the supervisor is ateam member, a partner.
And to your point,Jill, certainly has
a level of expertise,but not necessarily more
than the team members,who, in a sense,
(09:17):
are in a flattened,horizontal dynamic.
And now, the team leader isresponsible for, let's say,
keeping the projectmoving on time,
taking a look at how themeasurements were going,
meeting with individualsand subgroups
within that team to makesure that even the subparts
of a project or an initiative ora series of business objectives
(09:39):
were being met.
And now that personis more of a coach,
a feedback loop,leader, if you will,
someone who is able tobuild trust at a high level,
and needs to be open to beingtold that things were not
working well, and they neededto work with the management
to crunch the project byadding another person,
(10:00):
taking a look atelongating the timeline,
looking at the criticalpath to make sure
that they were going to meetthe expectations, ultimately,
of what was expected in termsof the performance model
of the product or service.
And also that they weregoing to be trusted
to go to the seniormanagement team or the C-suite
was going to honestly andfairly and accurately represent
(10:21):
how things were going.
And so trust became the currencymuch more so than ever before.
And power, althoughit's there, there's
a differential now, becausewhen you're empowering people
to get work done, then trustis a facilitative mechanism
or energy that helps youto move forward in a way
where you're going toultimately get things done,
(10:43):
and people aregoing to trust you,
that if there has to besome tough decisions made,
that you're going to makedecisions that are in the best
interest of everybodyon the team, of course,
in alignment with theexpectations of the C-suite
or the senior manager.
JILL FINLAYSON (10:56):
So the world is less vertical, more horizontal.
If you are tryingto lead in this more
horizontal, flatworld, how do you
build this newcurrency of trust?
If you don't haveautomatic power,
how do you build the trustthat's the new currency?
RON COVERSON (11:14):
I think there's a respect with team members
because people areadult, and they
are expert in theirindividual contributors,
and they understandhow important it is
to get the project work done.
So inherently,you've got people who
are good at what they do,they're smart, they're capable,
they have certainly,team-building skills, hopefully.
That's part of therequisite competency list
(11:35):
that you're lookingfor when you're
hiring people in the newworld of work anyway,
along with what we callemotional intelligence,
the ability to work throughdifferences and conflict.
So inherently, you havepeople who respect a leader.
That's expected,that they would have
that respect for the leader.
But there also has to be anexpectation that leader is
(11:56):
a good listener, seeksto understand first,
and then to be understood later.
And that, that leaderwill facilitate
a credible relationshipby doing what
they say they'regoing to do, following
a collaborative process.
And that's what I mean bytrust becomes that currency.
So the credibility ofthe leader is much higher
because it isn't about power.
And that alsospeaks to the issue
(12:18):
that there's an expectationthat, that person is empowered
to do their job, and they'renot being micromanaged,
so that they can also model thisempowerment approach as they
supervise and leadothers in the team.
JILL FINLAYSON (12:29):
So if you're not a middle manager,
you're a team leader.
You actually havealmost a different skill
set that you need to developand different processes
to build those relationalconnections and the credibility?
You talk aboutcredibility, integrity.
How do people showthat they're credible?
I mean, that's not somethingthat you can just say,
(12:50):
"I'm credible."
RON COVERSON (12:51):
No.
No, you're right.
The business world todayis, what we used to call,
the show me state.
You've got to beable to perform.
And even if you're astrategist, as a team leader,
you've got to also be tactician.
You've got to model both.
Sometimes you have to beable to show someone exactly
the way something needsto happen or get done.
You can't just say,"We'll figure it out."
(13:13):
So you've got, credibilitycomes from modeling, Jill.
Credibility comesfrom keeping your word
or saying, "I need tomeet again with you all
because I'm not going to beable to get that done on time.
And I do apologize, butI was hoping to do it,
but I wanted to at least betransparent and talk to you
about that."
So being honest,open, and transparent
is a quality of trust building.
But one of the things thatI've introduced in classes
(13:34):
and in some of the workI've done in leading teams
is to talk about, howdo we define trust?
What's a simple,straightforward way
of actually articulating howtrust performs or is activated
in the real world?
And so I have a formulathat looks like this.
There's a numeratorand a denominator.
In the numerator, there'sthe credibility factor,
which we'll come back totalking about in a moment.
(13:55):
And when you addrapport to that,
which is the relationalpiece, you've
got what you mainly needto move forward effectively
in your efforts to build trustwith individuals and groups.
When we say credibility, wedon't just mean expertise.
We don't just mean doing whatyou say you're going to do.
We're talking about the waythat you show up relationally,
(14:16):
and we're talkingabout the way that you
help get things done byrolling up your sleeves,
by participating with the team,by collaborating effectively
with them.
So that when they thinkabout you as a leader,
they not just think about youin terms of your leadership
responsibility, but theyalso think about you
as a full member of the team,that you're participating fully.
You have everyone's notonly best interest in mind,
(14:39):
you have, what wecall, skin in the game.
You really see this as notwhat they're responsible to,
but what we are responsible to.
So you move from a"they" to a "we" thing.
And those are the thingsthat facilitate trust.
Now, I talked about thenumerator, the credibility
plus rapport.
But on the denominator,we have risk.
So in every single engagement,Jill, with every single project,
(14:59):
there's something at risk.
There's what's at riskfor the client groups.
There's what's at riskfor the senior management
team or the C-suite.
There's what's at riskfor every participant
on the team orcross-functional team,
because oftentimes, thereare cross-functional
responsibilities to getthings done between,
let's say, IT and marketing,or between HR and finance,
(15:22):
in terms of budgetary pieces.
So there are all thesedynamics happening,
so everybody has risk.
So one of thethings that you want
to do when you're thinkingabout building trust
with an individual isto think about what's
that risk for themto participate
in a way that's goingto be meaningful
for them and for all of us?
And then when you lookat the team dynamic,
because there's certainlya performance element,
(15:43):
and the team is goingto be looked at as well,
and people want the bestpossible outcome of how
the team is viewed before thenext project comes up, at least.
So I talk about what'sat risk for people?
In the classroom, we actuallyhave fun exercises and case
studies where we look at, whatwas that risk for so-and-so?
What was that risk in terms ofthis currency of trust process
(16:03):
for the senior managementteam to empower
a team within theorganizational structure
to get an importantinitiative off the ground
and ultimately, either handit off or accomplished?
So it's reallyimportant to think
about what's at risk forpeople, and to recognize
that if there's a higher risk,you need more credibility.
And if there's a higherrisk, you need more rapport.
(16:25):
So that requirestime with people.
And ultimately,business is always
going to be relational,even in the new world of AI.
JILL FINLAYSON: What do you think (16:31):
undefined
your students were mostsurprised by in doing
these activities?
And thinking about changingtheir team management style,
what surprised them the most?
RON COVERSON (16:41):
I think there were several things, Jill.
One is that because we do alot of our exercises in teams,
there are three in severalclasses, major projects that
are done in teams, so one ofthe things that they learned
or realized, whetherthey were currently
functioning on aregular basis in a team
or whether it was a relativelynew construct for them
(17:04):
or idea of businessfunction in the work world,
was that they had to makesure their communication
skills and their approachto how they listened
and how they communicatedwith their team members
to really come up with thebest options to solve a case
or address a case,was up to par.
And they would come back withfeedback and say, I realized,
I'm not really listeningto my team that well.
(17:26):
And they would actually confessthat in the middle of a larger
class review of thebreakout sessions, and say,
"I've got to listen betterto Bob and Suzanne in order
to understand how they view thecomplications of solving this
case issue or meeting theexpectation of this case."
And the other thing thatthey would often say
is that, "I'm moreof an introvert.
(17:47):
I'm not really an extrovert,so I prefer not to really talk
as much," or "I'lltake on an assignment,
but I don't necessarily want topartner with a bunch of people
to do that assignment, sojust the whole team dynamic is
a little weird for me."
So, we would ask peopleto go away and do
some self-examination aboutwhat your work style is, so
that other people can bestunderstand how you work best
(18:08):
so they can adjust andadapt to your work style.
So we use a modelcalled D-I-S-C--
DISC-- which I think ispretty familiar in most
of the market places ofleast, the US, if not abroad.
And that allows people toplay around with work style
differentials, and start tobegin to think about how can I
be a better team memberto Bob and Lamar,
(18:28):
who have a very differentapproach to the work than I do?
JILL FINLAYSON (18:31):
Empowering is kind of a two-way street,
though.
It isn't just the teammanager or team leader.
It's the person on the team.
So how do you seeempowerment and how do you
make it work mosteffectively as you're guiding
students in this process?
RON COVERSON (18:47):
So one of the amazing things about UC
Berkeley's performancemanagement model--
it's the best I've ever seen--
it's really about mutuality.
It's really about growingtogether in the workplace.
It's really about negotiatingwith another person or a team
to establish ground rules andobjectives for how they're
going to work together throughthe course of the year,
(19:09):
and to establish goalsalong those same lines.
And so some of those goalswould be individual goals
for that person to meetfor the sake of the team
and their supervisor.
And some of those goalsare team-oriented goals
that would even include themanager to be a part of it.
And that should bearticulated in the goal.
And then, ultimately,an individual's success
(19:30):
should be characterizedby the team's success.
So a supervisor that'sfollowing this model--
This Achieve Together model,that's what it's called.
It's very mutualistic--needs to make sure
that they are takingresponsibility
for facilitating an equitable,fair, just, and clearly metriced
(19:51):
set of goals.
And one of those goals shouldbe a developmental goal
for that person.
And to me, theseare the things that
sort of representand characterize
what mutuality is all about.
It's not about a top-down thing.
It's not about what you have todo for me as your supervisor.
It's about us, and how we getthis done together, how we
achieve these goals together.
JILL FINLAYSON (20:11):
I like this work as a conversation
and kind of bringing it upa level, making sure people
understand the shared visionand how their role fits
into that team goal.
What happens when a teammember isn't measuring up,
isn't pulling their weight?
What does the conversationlook like then?
RON COVERSON (20:29):
I think it starts with the initial relationship
at the beginning of theyear, the Achieve Together
conversation.
And it starts there,where you make agreements.
"Claudia, I justwant you to know
that there are going to be timeswhen you may disagree with me,
and I just want to make surethat we can disagree and not
be disagreeable.
And there are going to betimes when, most of the time,
(20:51):
there's going to be ideascoming from you and others,
and I'm going to say that's abetter idea than the ones we
came up with before, orthe one that I thought
was the best approach,the best way forward.
And then there aregoing to be times
when I need to makean executive decision,
because that's myresponsibility,
and I've listened enough,and I've heard from people,
and I've heard fromour client groups,
and I've heard from oursenior management team,
and now, we've got to moveforward with this decision.
(21:11):
All I'm asking isthat, at some point,
the conversationstops, and you're
doing what you'resupposed to do,
and we move forward together.
The flip side of that is that ifyou're not meeting expectations,
then we have to havethose conversations.
And my approach isgoing to be initially,
what's getting in the way?
What obstacles arethere that I can remove?
Is there trainingin intermediate,
(21:33):
an Excel sheet work so that--
Excel spreadsheetthat you're working on
can be more accurateand more reliable?
What is it thatyou need from me?
And ultimately, here's whatyou're responsible for."
So what I believe isthat every individual
has to take responsibilityfor their contributions
to challenges or problems thatthey may be either inadvertently
or just unconsciouslyparticipating in.
(21:57):
And that could be a lot ofundermining of what they think
should be done in the project.
That could be notbeing respectful
of others, acollaborative sense.
The emotional intelligencepiece, Jill, as you well know,
is a huge factor inevaluating performance.
And that includes all thefactors we're talking about,
but also your communicationskills, your listening skills,
(22:17):
your ability to be acollaborator and a good partner.
When I have a verydifficult situation,
I will call thatperson into my office,
and I'll have, whatI call, Jill, the you
and you conversation.
And what that means is thatI will take a look at--
Let's say, the person'sbeen here for 18 months--
I'll take a look at backto the day we hired John,
and how we were so excited, andhow we agreed on the objectives
(22:40):
back 18 monthsago, and we agreed
on how we'd go aboutdoing the work,
and we agreed that everyaspect of the job description
was what he agreed towas the expectation.
And I would say to him, "We'vehad several conversations over
the last nine months, and whatwe've seen, what I've seen--
when I say we, the team--
in terms of theagreements we all
(23:01):
made about everyindividual responsibility
and the contributionsthat we're making
to the success or thefailure of this project,
is that things havenot gone well with you.
It's a puzzle tome because we've
tried a lot of differentthings to address it.
So it's Friday afternoon.
You're who you are today,John, and you're not the person
that you were 18 monthsago when you signed up.
(23:22):
So I would like foryou to go home today
and through the weekendand look in the mirror
and have a conversation withthe you that took the job
and agreed to the objectives,and agreed to the job
description, and agreed to workwell with the team and with me.
It's not an issuebetween you and me.
It's not an issue betweenyou and the law school
or the business team thatyou happen to be working on.
(23:42):
It's you and you.
The you that signed upfor the role 18 months ago
and you today.
When you work thatout, let me know.
And if you need somehelp around that,
because we've gota lot of resources,
happy to help you with that.
But you need to comeback in the coming
week or two with a newapproach to what we're doing.
I'm looking for theJohn that started
(24:03):
with us in the fall of2023, not the John that's
here in front of me today.
So I need you and youto go work that out."
JILL FINLAYSON (24:10):
I like that you and you approach,
because it's very empoweringin a way to the person who
maybe isn't feeling agood fit at the moment.
And it's allowingthem to go reflect,
is this the right place?
Am I making the effort?
Am I that personwho took the job,
and what's changed since then?
If we want to takeit up a level,
I think, another thing, justsort on the macro level,
(24:30):
people are thinking aboutis if the hierarchy is flat,
how do I advance in my career?
There's no up to go to.
Can you tell us what weshould be thinking about?
RON COVERSON (24:42):
I really think some of the best conversations
that a supervisor canhave, and I've certainly
had with employees, andalso as an HR professional
with my directreports, is to help
them think about their career.
And it still is one ofthose conversations, Jill,
where we're asking themto own their career.
We can help from afacilitative standpoint,
from a chaperoning standpoint toguide and to dialogue and offer
(25:04):
recommendations.
But ultimately, everybodyhas to take responsibility
for their own career, for theirown success track, if you will.
We talk about that, andwe talk about owning
that, and that your supervisorand maybe someone in HR
can help you figure thatout better and create
a roadmap for that.
JILL FINLAYSON (25:20):
In a way, this is like the middle management
conversation.
Your job may not beup, it may be over,
or it may be diagonalbecause you're
changing teams or changingcompanies or even changing role
to advance.
But that's kind ofhard to do if you
don't know what those rolesare, or what you're equipped
to move diagonally into.
RON COVERSON (25:41):
Yeah.
And I think it'sa responsibility
of talent managementorganizations and HR
teams as a whole within schoolsand units or in the capital
market spaces to beavailable to help people
to either through thewebsite or other means
or consultation to take a lookat what are the options, what
are the possibilities here?
Because once again,retention should
(26:01):
be a goal of HR organizations,to encourage people to stay.
But not at the expenseof-- and to grow-- but not
the expense of their owncareer and vocational goals
and interests.
Because ultimately, if we arethe masters of their fate,
so to speak, then now, we'reback into a command and control
kind of thing, as opposedto empowering people
(26:22):
to be adult andtake responsibility
for their life, their career,and their vocational interests.
JILL FINLAYSON: There's a lot of data. (26:27):
undefined
Also says people don't wantto become people managers.
They want to advancein their career,
but they want to stay anindividual contributor.
So I was going to ask you,why you think that's the case,
and what are theoptions or alternative
paths for advancementif you want to remain
an independent contributor?
RON COVERSON (26:46):
Yeah, I still think,
even though it's something Ienjoy, being a people manager,
and I really don't like theterm people manager as much
as I like the phrase peopleleader or a leader of others,
because it's more reflectiveof what I've been describing
about the modelingaspect of a leader
or a supervisoror a team leader,
as we've been describing, Jill.
I've had conversations, as Ithink about the many years I've
(27:09):
been doing this, with managersand supervisors who've
come to me and said, "Ron,how do I stop being a manager?
I make good money.
I need to keep making thesame money I'm making,
but how do I move out?"
And I'll often say,"You're this level manager,
but you could be a P5.
You could be a professionalat the five level.
The salary scaleis commensurate,
(27:29):
and you've certainly earned itover the years you've been here.
And it's not going to bean easy outworking of it,
but I think theuniversity and the team
and the leadership herewould want to retain you.
So let's start havingthat conversation
with your supervisorand with others so
that we can look at the prospectof things changing for you
(27:50):
and where you start to unwind.
Your responsibilitymight take six months,
but you unwind yourresponsibility as a supervisor
and go back to being anindividual contributor."
Again, Jill, I've heardthat conversation more
in the past few years than I'dsay, five or 10 years prior.
And that's becauseit's really difficult,
A, managing or leading people ingeneral, and in a flatter world,
(28:11):
where, again, thedifferential is not power,
but the currency istrust, then that's
a much more difficultdynamic to facilitate.
And the skill set isvery different skill
set than you would needif you were in a power
kind of differentialcommand and control
role, which again, is, forthe most part, disappearing.
JILL FINLAYSON (28:32):
So if people are kind
of skirting aroundor moving around,
what does this mean forinstitutional memory?
What does this mean forsuccession planning?
RON COVERSON (28:40):
I'm a big believer in apprenticeship.
I know that it seems likean old world, 19th century,
turn of phrase, but I'm justreally a big believer in when
you assign a person to lead aproject or to have a certain set
of responsibilities, it's areally good idea to join them
with somebody else who has asimilar group of skill sets,
(29:03):
maybe working in a slightlydifferent subteam role,
but they can really addvalue to that person.
And also, theconversation should
be, to lead that, let's say,team leader in that context--
Let's say I'm overseeinga group of professionals
in several projects,several HR projects, really,
more as a coach and a consultantthan anything, and a strategist.
(29:26):
And I'll go to thatperson and say, "Margaret,
I just really think thatHomer is a great candidate
to be an assistant to Inthis important project,
because Homer has alot of AI background,
and we're talking about thistransition in this area of HR.
And I just would loveyou to work with him,
and also for you to share alot of the things about this
(29:47):
business and this area or thisparticular functionality."
And what I'll tell people islike, you can't be worried
about someone elsein a collaborative,
flatter construct being seenas better or more capable
than you are.
You're responsiblefor who you are.
You can create, design, andrepresent your own talent value
(30:10):
proposition.
I'm happy to help youfigure out that formula.
It's not complicated, and youshould be confident about that.
And just know that we're goingto play, as you said, Jill,
different roles anddifferent times.
Even in my executive capacity,I may play an entirely different
role in a certainseason, because whatever
the project or the initiativeor the objective requires.
(30:30):
Ego has to be-- talkabout flattening.
You have to flattenthat ego and be
willing to make adjustmentsand partner with other people
to get things done right,because ultimately,
that's what's themost important thing.
It's not about the individual,it's about the team.
So I like the idea of having anapprentice in certain scenarios.
So that if that person leaves,and they have the choice
to do that, thatlead person, you
(30:50):
have someone who has someinstitutional memory, knowledge,
and ability to takeon the project,
at least on an interimbasis, if that makes sense.
JILL FINLAYSON: What I really like (30:58):
undefined
about theapprenticeship model is
it's also unlocking thepathway to advancement.
You may not have thoughtabout this route,
but if you're giventhat opportunity,
it's going to open new doors, orjust make visible roles that you
might not have otherwise seen.
RON COVERSON (31:13):
That's exactly right.
And that goes on your resume.
I helped so and so, theirtitle, and this big project,
and I was able to help themin certain critical areas
to perform certain tasks,and have responsibility
in that area.
So you're actually leveling upwhen you're getting to do that.
One of the things--this thought came
(31:33):
to mind-- that I enjoyeddoing is challenging people
to present.
Instead of mepresenting a project,
process, or to provide afacilitation on where we're
at in terms of our planningand the metric and so on,
the measurement, I'll askother people to do that
or to co-facilitate.
And I've had people say,"Oh, I'm terrible as a public
(31:54):
speaker."
And I say, "Well, we're here.
It's a us thing,but, why don't you
take on at least thefirst 10 minutes, and talk
about these things,and you can even
solicit some of the rest ofus to share as subject matter
experts, around the table.
We'll be ready for that.
But I want you to lead becauseI want you to challenge yourself
to be in these situations.
Because ultimately, basedupon where you want to go,
(32:14):
that's going to be presenting infront of lots of people is going
to be part of what you're goingto need to be able to develop
a competency in."
JILL FINLAYSON: I absolutely love (32:20):
undefined
giving peoplestretch assignments,
giving themcommunication skills,
and that actually leadsme to talk about this.
You said you have to flattenyour ego to get things done,
but you also have tocommunicate with other teams
to get things done.
I don't feel like thingshappen in silos anymore.
So as you talk about thrivingin this flatter world,
(32:42):
what are somespecific strategies
for improving your communicationand cross-functional,
multidisciplinary skills tointeract with other teams
effectively?
RON COVERSON (32:52):
Yeah.
So I teach two courses, inparticular, on communication.
One is, literally,speaking and writing.
It's the fundamentalsof communication
in a new world of work, whichI'll come back to describing
a little bit more.
And the other is thestrategic communication piece
for managers,organizational-related
communication, whichhas several levels,
(33:13):
and is matrixedin a lot of ways.
And that particular course isfilled with real-world case
studies from real-worldorganizations and university
stories.
Of course, in some cases,the names have been redacted,
but a lot of other cases withthese capital market companies,
the names are there, becauseit was publicly known.
I say that to letpeople know that you
(33:34):
have to start with fundamentalcommunication abilities,
in terms of writingand speaking.
And as you know,Jill, writing an email
is very different than a DM,a chat, or even a phone call.
And you have to thinkabout your audience
no matter what the scenariois, what the writing task is,
whether it's a proposal, anemail follow-up, an update
(33:56):
on how the team is doing, howyou're doing on a project,
or it's just a short, chat,question kind of communication.
On the other side,you have to always
make sure people areperceiving you as professional,
as logical, as ordered in yourexplanation or your proposition,
and as making arequest in a clear way
so somebody canactually respond to it.
(34:17):
And you have to be able totake the time to do that.
So in our writingand speaking course,
we start on a very basic levelusing the different types
of media for ourcommunication, including Zoom,
and how you show upin those settings,
and that you develop those skillsets to do that effectively.
Then, there's also speaking.
They're speaking inthe public setting.
They're speakingin a Zoom scenario.
(34:38):
They're speaking to a group,a small group in a conference
room.
What are theimportant qualities?
Are you pithy?
Are you concise?
Do you stay on point?
How do you answer questions?
Are you honest in saying, "Idon't have an answer to that,
but I will get back toyou within the next day,
so thank you, and I'mgoing to write that down,
or flip chart that, or putthat on the whiteboard."
All these things reflectyour professionalism,
(35:00):
your credibility, yourintegrity, and writing
and speaking are two of themost important elements that
are never going to go away,that reflect your ability
to engender confidencein the people that
are asking you to get thingsdone in a certain role.
The communicationpiece, the ability
to collaborateeffectively, to continue
to improve yourcommunication skills,
(35:22):
to even take a courseon voice and diction--
A course, I took inmy undergraduate--
is going to make all thedifference in the world.
JILL FINLAYSON (35:29):
It's really challenging because there are,
what I would call,so many tech stacks.
You mentioned Zoom and Gmailand texting and messaging.
But there's also Slack andNotion and Asana and Jira
and all of these projectmanagement tools.
Does the same voice or tonework for all of these platforms?
What are the problems thatyou've seen people have,
(35:52):
and how do you help themto not have those kind
of misunderstandings?
RON COVERSON (35:56):
You've got to be able to know your audience
and what their expectations are.
If they're a group of ITprofessionals, software
engineers, they're going to havea different set of expectations
for the presentationor what you're
writing to them than, let'ssay, an audience of marketing
professionals or an audience ofeven HR professionals, right?
So you've got toknow your audience.
(36:16):
And if it's a diverse audience,cross-functional audience,
then you've got totry to write or speak
to the areas that areimportant to each group
to the best of your ability.
But it starts there.
And I find that especially withvery smart people who really
respect data and research,it's really important
(36:37):
to do research,do your homework.
So if you're bringing a proposalto bear either in PowerPoint
slides, in a presentationon Zoom, Jill, or in person
in a conference room, or you'rewriting a proposal in Word,
or let's say, in an email--
I think it's probablybetter to have
an introduction in the emailand then attach a Word document,
or attach it to a GoogleDoc, that people can actually
(37:01):
even comment on--
you have to do your homework,and footnote the research
and data points, because itbrings an objective credibility
to what you're tryingto get across to people,
to help-- to educate them, tohelp them understand things,
or to recommend adifferent course of action.
Opinions, we all have them.
But when you haveobjective data,
(37:22):
you have evidence, you havecase study with a brief on how
it worked out, that bringsa level of expertise that
is impressive to an audience.
And I recommend that.
So you really have toknow your audience,
understand whether it's going tobe a long or short presentation
or communication.
If it's writing, be brief,concise, and to the point.
As one writer saidmany years ago,
(37:44):
"Brevity is the soul of wit."
I think that was Shakespeare.
So you really just need to beconscientious of those things,
and just make sure that you'reshowing up professionally
in whatever manner ofcommunication that you represent
that day or for that occasion.
JILL FINLAYSON (37:57):
So this applies to both leaders, as well as
individual contributors.
Everybody needs these skills.
If you're anindividual contributor
and your manager goesaway, what should you
expect will happen to your role?
How will things change?
Are there other skills youneed besides good communication
skills when that happens?
RON COVERSON (38:18):
That's a good case study because that does happen.
And if I'm, let's say,a strategic director
in a division, andthere's a manager,
and there are teamleaders, the first thing
I want to say to that manageris, "Carl, I want to make sure
that if you go ona long vacation
or hopefully, you staywith us for a long time,
(38:40):
you move forward withanother opportunity,
I want to make sure thatBarbara and Jill are
ready to, at leaston an interim basis,
take on the responsibilitiesthat you hold currently.
So what are you going to do tomake sure that they're ready,
just in case you need totake a long vacation?"
Because I think that's oneof the responsibilities
(39:00):
of a leader.
When I was at Levimany years ago, Jill,
I was part of an elaborateleadership training program that
went on for severalmonths, and it
was just amazing set oflearning technologies that we
were using to develop leaders.
And one of the things we had todo was we had to write a memoir
saying that I'm going to begone on a sabbatical for three
months.
Is my team ready to takeon the responsibilities
(39:23):
of interim co-management orco-leadership in my absence?
What does that look like?
And I'll tell you, there werea lot of eyes glazing over
when that assignmentwas given out
in that particularset of workshops,
because most of themanagers or leaders
were not ready towrite that memoir
in an honest, open, andtransparent way, which was
part of the requirement, right?
(39:44):
Because you're going to getfeedback from consultants
to help you on that.
So I think that should be partof what a division leader, let's
just call it for the sake oflooking at a matrix organization
or dean of a law school orthe dean of a business school,
or the vice chancellor offundraising, or whomever,
should require that, and workwith the HR leadership team
(40:04):
to make sure thatthat's part of what's
expected in the performancemanagement process.
JILL FINLAYSON (40:09):
So I have a question.
Statistically, middle managers,at this point in time,
are 30% more likelyto be laid off.
If you are, what would be,considered a middle manager,
what should you doto make yourself
valuable, irreplaceable?
Should you be pivoting?
Should you berepositioning yourself?
Because it seems like a prettyscary time for middle managers.
RON COVERSON (40:31):
I think that's right.
It's always goingto be that way.
My first answer tothat question, Jill,
is everybody, whether you're amiddle manager or supervisor,
individual contributor,but let's talk specifically
about a middle manager, atall times and in all places,
you should never be satisfiedwith where you're at.
You should never be complacent.
You should take a look atwhat is the market requiring
(40:52):
of 0 person in thisrole in the future,
or someone that's a teamleader, or a supervisor?
Where do I need to upskill?
Do I need to get my master's?
And I'm not justsaying get a master's
for the sake of getting amaster's, but maybe there's
a credential in management orin leadership in the Extension
program.
In a very economically,doable way,
I can get certificateprogram done.
(41:13):
Also in HR, they have a reallygreat certificate program there,
and in other areas.
And I just think, nowadays, justhaving that experience in that
and working with teams inthose learning environments,
having cohorts through thecourse of a 10-week course,
you're just going to be able todevelop all kinds of new skills,
new approaches, different waysof working with other people,
(41:36):
because a lot of workgets done in teams.
And as I mentioned before, inthe cases that we use, and most
of my instructor colleaguesdo the same thing,
have the same similar model,and ultimately, you're
going to look back and say, thatwas a very worthwhile 10 weeks.
I'm going to keep doingthis and be upskilled.
So that you may not be amanager next time around,
but if you are, you're goingto be a much better manager
(41:57):
than you were before,because you were not stilted,
you're not complacent.
I have this model, and Ilearned it from my younger days
of being an athlete andalso working with artists,
is that you got toget better every day.
And what I noticed aboutathletes and others,
about artists, in general, isthat they're always rehearsing.
They're always practicing.
They're always upskilling.
(42:17):
They want to getbetter every day.
They're never satisfiedwith where they are.
They want to maximizetheir capabilities,
and that's an attitude ofthe mind and the heart.
And I think that ifyou're a middle manager,
you need to do a littlebit of introspection
before you get laid off sothat you're ready for that.
It's never easy.
I've been laid off in my career.
It's never easy.
(42:38):
I always try to lookat the glass half full.
OK, what's theopportunity ahead of me,
and what do I need to do to getready for that next opportunity?
JILL FINLAYSON (42:44):
And all of this flattening
is causing a lot of change,which causes anxiety and stress.
So do you have any finalwords of advice of how,
whether you're aboss, team leader,
or an individualcontributor, how
should you be thinkingabout the future of work
differently because of thisflat world that we're in?
RON COVERSON (43:04):
I just think you have to look at the--
become a glass half full person.
I'm not saying have apersonality transformation
or change.
But I like the story,Christopher Robin's story,
the Hundred Acre Woods.
Most people tend tobe Eeyore's, "Oh, no,
the world is comingto an end, and AI is
going to take over the world.
(43:24):
It's "The Matrix," in reality."
And then there are a lot ofother people who are Tiggers.
They just bounce.
I'm not saying wehave to be either
or, but I think itwould be a good idea
to do some personal work.
I'm a big believer in therapyand coaching and feedback.
Get a coach.
Have an honest, transparent,and confidential relationship
with that person.
Whatever you're paying,it's worthwhile.
(43:46):
Get the feedback and startworking in those areas,
and be honest with yourself.
Just really be superhonest with yourself.
Have a reality check, butnever lose confidence.
I'll tell you a quickstory to wrap this up.
When I was a sophomore inhigh school, I went through,
I think, what teenagerstend to go through,
just a real seasonof depression.
(44:06):
And I wouldn't sayit was full-fledged,
but I was just really,"You're not good at anything.
You keep failing at this.
You get an A here and a C there.
You're just kind of not reallywell-versed in anything that you
can hang your hat on, Ron."
And I remember walking acrossthe high school campus,
and it was one of those momentsof fate, and I believe in that.
(44:26):
And an old friend ofmine, Lenny Darden--
Lenny, if you ever see thispodcast, this is for you--
he walks up to me, because heand I were on the newspaper
staff in our middleschool, and we also
were on the yearbookstaff together.
And Lenny said,"Ron, come with me."
And I said, "No, I'm notgoing anywhere with you."
And he said, "Come with meto the journalism department,
because you're anamazing writer,
(44:48):
and we need someone like youbecause we don't have that great
a group of writers."
And I said-- Imean, he dragged me,
Jill, to thejournalism department.
The year later, I becamethe associate editor
of that newspaper.
The year after that,I became the editor
of that newspaper, the onlyhigh school daily newspaper
in the country.
And it changed my life, right?
(45:08):
So when you find outwhat you do best,
and you have confidencein those things,
don't let anybody tell youwhat you can or cannot do.
You figure out thatout for yourself.
You have confidence.
You determine that.
You have good friends who giveyou good, confidential feedback.
Encouragement is the bestthing to do with people that
are struggling in that way.
And ultimately, do somehomework, do some work,
and go to the next level.
(45:29):
But never be satisfiedwith where you are.
JILL FINLAYSON (45:31):
Thank you, Ron.
I love going to the next level.
And I love the fact thatpeople can see the flattening
as actually expandingopportunities,
because now they're notlimited to the structure
and the step-by-stepladder that you
had to climb forhierarchy in the past.
Now, you can almost chart yourown path and go diagonally
and go horizontally,rather than having
(45:52):
to just have a veryprescribed, vertical path.
RON COVERSON (45:55):
Thank you, Jill.
I've really enjoyedthis conversation.
Thank you so much forinviting me into it.
JILL FINLAYSON: Thank you so much. (46:00):
undefined
And with that, I hopeyou enjoyed this latest
in a long series ofpodcasts that we'll be
sending your way every month.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
Please share withfriends and colleagues
who may be interested in takingthis Future of Work journey
with us.
And make sure to check outextension.berkeley.edu,
to find a varietyof courses to help
you thrive in this newworking flat landscape.
(46:21):
And to see what's comingup at EDGE in Tech,
go ahead and visitedge.berkeley.edu.
Thanks so much forlistening, and we'll
be back next month tocontinue our discussions
on the Future of Work.
The Future of Work Podcastis hosted by Jill Finlayson,
produced by Sarah Benzuly,edited by Matt Dipietro, Natalie
Newman, and Alicia Liao.
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
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!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com