THE EVOLUTION OF THE TURKEY MANAGERS

Endangered Species

Unfortunately for better or for worst, the world of management has changed. In today’s highly competitive bottom line driven dog eat dog world, there has been a massive growth in predatorial animals in management positions. As the title suggested, you have a high likelihood in the 2000 era to be managed by a turkey simply because the workplace has been a fertile breeding ground for such behaviour.. 

With this trend, we have noticed the emergence of group of managers who will find it increasingly difficult to survive despite their loyalty and dedication to the job. We classify them as the endangered species. 

The last case study will provide a species that falls into the survival category and uses its highly developed interpersonal skills to adapt to the increasingly hostile work environment. 


CASE STUDY 13

Our next character is commonly referred to as the solid citizen in most organisations. He might not agree with all policies and politics but would remain loyal to the organisation and supportive of all those within. He had been in the organisation for many years, acquired much organisational history and had experienced the ‘highs and lows’ that went with the job and the industry. 

He was good planner and organiser, highly consulting and very considerate of the feelings of others. He worked on the philosophy that if you can’t say anything positive then don’t say it at all. With his own staff, he was very supportive and consoling in difficult times. However, he had a tendency to ignore his role as an advocate or representative for his people in order not to rock the boat. This was often viewed as being non assertive behaviour and submitting to more powerful managers. 

What we have just described above is a broad description of many “nice” managers. Let’s give you two examples of managers with some differences in their approach but still essentially the same animal.. 

Mr D was a long serving senior manager in a quite bureaucratic and top heavy organisation. He was very supportive and encouraging to all the people who reported to him. People were a priority in his role and he would accord them the time that they needed. This was a wonderful quality and had earned him the reputation as “Mr nice Guy”. However, when we examined his motivation and values, we could fully understand where this behaviour stemmed from. When interacting with Mr D as non-staff member, you only have respect and admiration for the man. 
He was an obvious candidate as the role model of the manager you would like to have. As an observer in the management meeting, we saw another facet of him. One that was non-confrontational to the point that the needs of the others may prevail over his own or the needs of his staff. Regardless of the point of discussion, Mr D would unconditionally support the views of the CEO and adjusted his own position to accommodate the latter. He might have a legitimate view contrary to that of the CEO however this would never be raised with the fear of being seen as a dissident. This point of view stemmed from his need of wanting to be liked and approved and his view of “why bite the hand that feeds me”? 
Characteristics of a Dog 
Loyal
Territorial 
Enjoy routine
Excitable
People focused (man’s best friend)
Recognition seeking
Invoke a sense of security 
Reliable 
Never bite the hands that feed it
Adaptable 

CASE STUDY 14

Mr E comes across as a non-descript, quiet individual who was competent in his area of expertise but perhaps lack some of the more flamboyant skills displayed by the high flyers. He was task focused particularly in a work environment. He was comfortable with structure, methods and systems and approached work in a deliberate and methodical manner. 

I met Mr E at the new staff induction where his role was to provide advice on the financial aspect of my employment. After a brief introduction, Mr E systematically approached the subject matter in a slow and deliberate manner. He presented the information succinctly with little time dedicated to the social niceties. This reinforced the image of a shy, reserved and task oriented accountant. It was not until the first social function that we ever broached the subjects outside the scope of work. Over a few beers, I found him a most relaxed, family man with a simple approach to life and unshakeable and steady nature. Unfortunately these were the very qualities that presented his undoing in this corporate environment. As a long serving manager who quietly and efficiently got things done, he was constantly fixing up the mistakes of others. This caused him significant aggravation as this was outside his systematic and structured approach to his work. In the end, Mr E found the work environment chaotic and stressful and he resigned to take on work more in line with his values. 

Whilst he was not popular in a traditional sense, he was well liked by staff as a fair and equitable manager and his resignation was a shock and left a gaping hole in the organisation. Mr E would always greet you in a predictable manner with a smile and a succinct ‘hello’. He was rock of Gibraltor for this organisation and his resignation sent far reaching ripples eroding the morale of the remaining staff. 

We have classified Mr E as an engendered species for a number of reasons. Firstly, this manager had a relatively low profile and was a quiet achiever, although his achievements were seldom recognised for their worth. Secondly, this species had very sound principles and he would find difficult to manage in a highly political arena. Unfortunately these are the type of managers that are only missed once they are gone, when a gaping hole begins to appear. In the high flying 90s, this manager is becoming more of a dinosaur unless they are restricted solely to their areas of expertise. 


Overall, both managers created far more good will and positive experience than most people in the organisation. This in itself deserves our admiration. Most organisation would be a better place if they had less preditorial managers and more people oriented managers. Due to their high degree of loyalty and adaptability they will continue to be an integral and relevant part of the organisation. In today’s competititve and fast moving corporate world, these managers are the glue that bind people together and smooth many conflict situations. 

Characteristics of an Elephant
Steady and unshakeable
Patient 
Accommodating 
Slow and deliberate
Easy to get along