In this modern era, management has been introduced to and often embraces a softer approach to dealing with personnel issues. The fire service is no exception to this phenomenon. After all, our employees are more educated than ever before, the Generation X new hires don't respond well to Theory X management styles and the hard-line approach appears to be somewhat outdated.
As managers we have also been buffeted with seminars that detail our personality type and profile so we can get in touch with our style of management and more fully understand how we are received and perceived by our personnel. I am proposing that no single form of management style will maximize a modern and diverse workforce. I submit that managers who buy into the notion of having a singular style or philosophy of management are either kidding themselves or limiting themselves, thereby not fully maximizing or appreciating their workforce.
I want to introduce a concept that I call the "adaptive management philosophy." This theory assumes that the manager becomes the type of manager needed for the particular situation. Because of his or her ability to adapt to the need of the employee(s), the adaptable manager has the full range of the management spectrum from which to operate, thereby increasing the number of tools needed to cope with each individual personnel scenario.
One can observe from the Management Continuum Model (see diagram) that utilization of a single management theory severely limits the manager of valuable tools. The Old Personnel Administration (Old PA) theory does not provide the manager with the tools necessary to be flexible, innovative and creative. The workforce under the Old PA has no real freedom and autonomy. The authority is centralized, does not include input from the employees and disenfranchises the worker who desires to contribute to the organization. However, this style or philosophy should not be eliminated from the manager's toolbox. This style is highly effective in military and/or quasi-military organization during times of battle (such as a fireground). Other applications where this mode would be effective include situations involving relatively uneducated employees with jobs that are very task oriented. Additionally, this mode would be effective for problem employees who have proven that they cannot operate with freedom and autonomy, but require direct supervision.
The New PA is an excellent style when the workforce has proven that it can operate without direct supervision, or has an educational level and understanding of the organization such that its input is vital for the organization's objectives being met. Employees who work well within the New PA philosophy have submitted to the authority of those above them in the organization.
This level of employee can often be empowered with authority beyond the scope of his or her normal position within the organizational flow chart. Their job descriptions tend to be more vague and general in nature. These jobs are geared toward meeting the objectives of the organization rather than listing groups of tasks to be accountable for. New PA gives these employees the freedom and autonomy to be innovative and creative.
Managers attempting to run an organization with an exclusive view of the New PA can find themselves with a visionless, leaderless, almost chaotic environment if all employees are treated as peers with no hierarchical structure whatsoever. If this becomes the case, then the organization has no head, or far too many heads. This translates into either no collective vision or far too many visions. In either case there is no direction for the organization. This leads to confusion and chaos.
The third theory that can emerge from this continuum is the Blended PA. This is an attempt to take the good from both the left and right sides of the continuum. On its face value, it sounds like a good practice. However, this style leaves the manager only limited movement to the left or right.
The Blended PA theory espouses a "no extreme, middle of the road" approach. Should the manager be placed in a position where he or she must closely watch the actions of borderline or unproven employees, the manager is limited as to how much Theory X can be applied. The same problem in reverse will be held for the Blended PA manager who cannot let go of the authority to fully empower what could very well be a deserving, dynamic workforce. There is not enough Theory Y to really get the job done.
What will ultimately happen to the Blended PA manager is he or she ends up treating all the employees practically the same. Workers see the lack of reward for going the extra mile and adjust their production speed down several notches to blend with the masses.
Flexibility For Managers
The Adaptable PA theory gives the manager the latitude to become the kind of manager needed in a particular situation. If the organization is quasi-military in nature, in times of peace the manager has the ability to be flexible, thus shifting to the right of the continuum. In emergencies the manager can shift to a more autocratic posture remaining in full control. The manager has at his or her disposal the full range of the spectrum from which to choose to operate. Proven, trusted employees can be given the full authority needed to carry out the objectives of the organization. The input of these employees is needed, desired and utilized.
At the same time, the Adaptable manager has the ability to invoke an extremely top down, centralized Theory X style of management when the situation dictates. The key to the success of the Adaptable PA is the ability of the manager to rightfully discern the style most appropriate for the given scenario.
Society as a whole can benefit from this Adaptive Theory. The versatility of this concept is such that it will adapt well beyond that of the private sector and even beyond the public sector. This adaptive, situational principle applies universally to any and all relationships involving an authority figure and subordinate.
Take, for instance, the relationship between parents and children. The adaptive theory allows users to be the authority figures during the crucial formative years. Yet it enables parents to be flexible and give latitude to maturing children as they prove themselves faithful in the little things.
Another example is the relationship between the teacher and student. During the elementary years, when respect for authority is so vital, the adaptive theory lends itself well to operating on the left side in order to provide the needed structure for learning and, no less important, the respect for the teacher. As the students mature, more flexibility and privileges can be instituted hence operating more on the right side of the continuum is in order.
Extreme swings of management styles from one side of the continuum to the other on the same employee or group of employees can quickly erode any level of trust that had previously been developed. This is the juncture where theory and practical applications intersect.
Managers need to be mindful that the theory utilized in the continuum is not what manages personnel. The model is a concept, a resource from the toolbox. Recognizing the applicable tool for the given situation is crucial for success. Real people are still required to address real personnel issues. It is easy to "wax on" concerning theory and concept. Employing these concepts and delivering the product in the real world takes real work. Employing these three "Real Work Components" will greatly enhance the manager's ability to adapt in management style include:
Meeting regularly with employees. The culture of the organization is a significant variable to consider before employing the varying degrees of the Adaptable PA theory. Managers need to have a good feel for the pulse of the different employee groups. The fully apprised manager will have anticipated many of the concerns of the employees in advance of these meetings.
Often, employees simply need to vent some frustration. Given the proper parameters this can very healthy. No matter which side of the continuum one is operating from, employees need a voice. This is also the arena in which to communicate both one's vision and expectations. Since these meetings will be recurring, this is also an excellent opportunity to discuss progress within the unit and make adjustments if needed.
Listening to employees. It is not enough to have obligatory meetings that allow the rank and file the forum to blow off some steam. Nor is it appropriate to consume the entire meeting listening to oneself. Listening with true empathy and concern develops goodwill no matter where on the continuum one is operating.
Keeping your word. Empty promises dash hopes and morale simultaneously. It is far better to exceed an expectation than to fall short of it. Managers should not only deliver on what they have said they will do, the manager should go an extra step to ensure the expectation is exceeded. This sets an example for all subordinates and or associates to follow.
Another added benefit is that the more one sacrifices for the employees, the more appreciation one will develop for the employee. It doesn't matter if you're dealing with a crusty old veteran who can't say anything nice or a loyal mid-level manager who is always eager to please; everyone appreciates being appreciated.
Personnel administration from anywhere on the continuum is all about knowing your people, developing a relationship based on mutual trust and respect, exploiting employee strengths and constantly shoring up areas that need help through training and professional development.
If the wise manager will apply both the Adaptable Theory and Real Work components, the wise manager will find himself or herself operating on the right side of the continuum more and more.
Chief Concerns is a forum addressing issues of interest to chief fire officers. Opinions expressed are those of the writer. We invite all volunteer and career chief fire officers to share their concerns, experiences and views in this column. Please submit articles to Chief Concerns, Firehouse Magazine, 445 Broad Hollow Road, Melville, NY 11747.
Greg H. Neely is a district chief with the Tulsa, OK, Fire Department. He is a field instructor and program coordinator for Oklahoma State University/Fire Service Training as well as an adjunct instructor for the National Fire Academy. Neely is working on his master's degree in fire and emergency management from OSU and is in his final year of the National Fire Academy's Executive Fire Officer Program. He also provides assessment center training, promotional assessments and examinations, along with officer development. Neely can be contacted via e-mail at [email protected].
