Middle management where are you in the hierarchy?

DonDaddyD

OK, its come up a couple of times now. What is all the beef with middle managers?

Firstly my stance. A job is a job. Society is shaped so that we have to work to earn a living. I don't begrudge people working and I don't think people should be disrespected because of their job, even if that job is something I personal wouldn't do (recruitment consultant). In the end we have to make a living, right?

So why do some people say "Middle Manager" as though the person in the job has failed in life.

Perhaps they got to a point in their career where they don't want to go any further professionally as they have other time commitments or value other aspects in life. Is this something to look down on the 'Middle Manager' for?

Yes I get the undertones of "I don't need some 'toy manager' to tell me what to do". But some people do and sometimes you need support and when you get it and its good support most are grateful.

So I ask, what is so bad about being a middle manager?

And also what do you do for a living and where would you place your job in the organisations hierarchy?

Kieran_Burns

Ahhhh...

normality has been restored.


A DDD directionless diatribe first thing on a Monday morning 8)

Would this be DDDDD?

notsoblue

Business needs a hierarchy to function correctly. Some people resent their place in that hierarchy.

DonDaddyD

Well back on form and all that.

Now where's Spen/Monkeypump/Mybreakfastconsisted to make me lose my temper.

suzyb

Bottom of the tree with no desire to be any higher up it.

Some people are just not designed to have responsibility or manage others, I'm one of them.

MrChuck

Right at the bottom, which suits me fine at the moment. Your perceived status is for other people to get hung up on IMO.

shm_uk

notsoblue wrote:

Business needs a hierarchy to function correctly. Some people resent their place in that hierarchy.

And some people resent others above them in said hierarchy.

Within the organisation I work for the senior managers are the ones referred to in a derogatory fashion most often. We have more direct contact with the middle managers so there's a bit of relationship built up, whereas the senior mgrs... nobody seems to believe half of what they say or trust half of the decisions.

notsoblue

shm_uk wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Business needs a hierarchy to function correctly. Some people resent their place in that hierarchy.

And some people resent others above them in said hierarchy.

Within the organisation I work for the senior managers are the ones referred to in a derogatory fashion most often. We have more direct contact with the middle managers so there's a bit of relationship built up, whereas the senior mgrs... nobody seems to believe half of what they say or trust half of the decisions.

Yeah, thats a pretty common view. And its a waste of time in my opinion. You either have influence or you don't. If you don't, and you want it, then you should work towards getting it or just accept your position. Bitterness and mistrust doesn't help anyone.

CyclingBantam

Is the problem not with how middle managers behave as opposed to the actual fact they are middle managers?

I work for a very, very large organisation just below the 'middle management' level. I get very frustrated when you see management simply passing on bad news messages from the top but then claiming they don't agree with it either to appear the good guy.

They will never challenge senior management so you end up looking at them as nothing more than a messanger.

I find a lot in our organisation have little or no sway in anything that happens and yet you will get the odd one or two good managers that do actually make a difference which then show's up the rest for the weak managers they are.

DonDaddyD

CyclingBantam wrote:

Is the problem not with how middle managers behave as opposed to the actual fact they are middle managers?

I work for a very, very large organisation just below the 'middle management' level. I get very frustrated when you see management simply passing on bad news messages from the top but then claiming they don't agree with it either to appear the good guy.

They will never challenge senior management so you end up looking at them as nothing more than a messanger./

This seems a bit naive to me. What do you expect them to do.

1). It's there job to do so and doing their job is considered professional.

2). How do you know they haven't voiced their views privately with senior management. it may not be appropriate or more to the point its unprofessional to openly disagree with senior management infront of other staff.

There are many decisions I disagree with, I always raise my concerns privately and I am respected for doing so.

asprilla

I'm self employed. I'm a great boss in that I don't get on my back, give myself loads of holidays and allow me to work at my own pace.

Unfortunately I'm also a shit employee, regularly shirking responsibility, turning up late and looking scruffy, and generally being an arse.

bigmat

I had a similar conversation with a GP at the weekend, in the context of the government proposals to get rid of primary care trusts and get GP's to manage their own affairs. We agreed that this was not a great idea and it was a situation where middle managers were being got rid of for the sake of it and without considering that they do actually have an important role to play. I think we concluded that there probably need to be fewer people in middle management, but paid more to ensure they are competent and motivated to do the job properly.

Monkeypump

DonDaddyD wrote:

Well back on form and all that.

Now where's Spen/Monkeypump/Mybreakfastconsisted to make me lose my temper.

Nice to get a personal mention, but I'm a middle manager too so I guess I'm robbed of any ammunition!

I think there are few self-perpetuating stereotypes about middle management which reinforce the negative image. DDD - as I think you posted in the thread which prompted this one - some middle managers are just seen as the bringer of bad news and the robber of glory. No surprise they're not loved.

There are also a lot of middle managers who see themselves as better than their subordinates, and are desperate senior-management wannabes. I suspect these are the ones who irritate most as they so obviously suck-up to their superiors and sh*t on everyone else.

However, in my organisation (a small/mid size pharma company) the middle managers are generally a decent bunch who have worked their way up. There are a few ambitious brown-nosers, but fortunately they’re the minority.

Middle management is tough – you often get caught somewhere in the grey area between ‘them’ and ‘us’. Yes, you do have to be the one to break bad news sometimes, keep teams motivated and balance being a team member’s mate and manager. But I’m still operational (not just a line manager) so I still get to do some real work (when I’m not winding DDD up).

I accepted this position as one step in my career – I’m not that bothered if the image of middle manager is a bad thing.

tailwindhome

I am but a lowly beancounter trying to make his way in the world

deptfordmarmoset

Asprilla wrote:

I'm self employed. I'm a great boss in that I don't get on my back, give myself loads of holidays and allow me to work at my own pace.

Unfortunately I'm also a shoot employee, regularly shirking responsibility, turning up late and looking scruffy, and generally being an ars*.

You sound like the kind of person I could happily work for

rick_chasey

Monkeypump wrote:

There are also a lot of middle managers who see themselves as better than their subordinates, and are desperate senior-management wannabes. I suspect these are the ones who irritate most as they so obviously suck-up to their superiors and sh*t on everyone else.

In Yugoslavia they are known as "cyclists". Always bowing their head above, but stamping like mad underneath.

gtvlusso

The stereotyped view of middle managers is:

1, Failed Sales people

2, Shameless self promotors who have evaded responsibility for their screw ups and always taken responsibility for other peoples success.

3, Promoted outside of capability by a mate - nepotism as such.

I am afraid to say that my experience of most middle managers has been of the above - but there are a few very good people out there who have worked hard and are very good. Luckily my current boss is very very good and very supportive.

I have worked for some retards though......I worked for one guy, ex-army, who's basic spelling and grammar was awful. He also bullshitted about his army career (made out he was pseudo special forces or worked with special forces) - he was quite badly bullied during his tenure in the army, some of his colleagues have stated. He turned into a complete tit when placed in private industry, full of cliche, but no actual action.

This is also a guy who claimed to love Rugby, but when we actually played a game and he was put in for a try with no opposition, threw the ball down rather than maintaining control of the ball......retard.

il_principe

DonDaddyD wrote:

CyclingBantam wrote:

Is the problem not with how middle managers behave as opposed to the actual fact they are middle managers?

I work for a very, very large organisation just below the 'middle management' level. I get very frustrated when you see management simply passing on bad news messages from the top but then claiming they don't agree with it either to appear the good guy.

They will never challenge senior management so you end up looking at them as nothing more than a messanger./

This seems a bit naive to me. What do you expect them to do.

1). It's there job to do so and doing their job is considered professional.

2). How do you know they haven't voiced their views privately with senior management. it may not be appropriate or more to the point its unprofessional to openly disagree with senior management infront of other staff.

There are many decisions I disagree with, I always raise my concerns privately and I am respected for doing so.

Passing on bad news and not toeing the company line is bad management IMHO 'oh it's not my fault, balme the directors' etc. People to weak to challenge their managers shouldn't be managing themselves. Challenge is positive if backed up by evidence and alternatives.

Unfortunately many senior managers are not actually very good people managers, they set the culture and tone of an organisation. If they are not effective leaders/managers most managers underneath them will struggle...

il_principe

An aside: Sadly many people who become managers are either given no training, or training so bad that it has a negative effect.

DonDaddyD

BigMat wrote:

I had a similar conversation with a GP at the weekend, in the context of the government proposals to get rid of primary care trusts and get GP's to manage their own affairs. We agreed that this was not a great idea and it was a situation where middle managers were being got rid of for the sake of it and without considering that they do actually have an important role to play. I think we concluded that there probably need to be fewer people in middle management, but paid more to ensure they are competent and motivated to do the job properly.

OK much like a Director said to me. I don't have any objection working for a private health care organisation that provides National Healthcare Services (i.e. NHS)

GP's are, arguably, in the best position to identify what health needs are required by the general public. Whether they can manage/commission a billion £ budget is a seperate issue and requires a seperate skill set.

We've had GP commissioning before, it failed miserably and this led to PCTs. .

The Health and Social Care Bill is being revisitied for a number of reasons and if the proposals around GP commissioning happens i.e. involve hospital staff, nurses, hospital doctors and finance professionals. Then that would look surprisingly like the now defunct PCTs. In fact it would look like it so much so that all those people secretly made redundant may be re-employed at a cost of billions that the Government hasn't cared to mention.

Also another issue is that the Health and Social Care Bill wasn't even passed and the order from above was to eradicate and close PCTs so the current Government were already implementing the bill before it went through the House of Lords. There are also fears that it favours private health care organisations - it was frightening stuff.

The sacking of middle managers has very little to do with GP commissioning. GPs were to form small commissioning boards that would commission health services from NHS or Private health care firms.

The type of middle managers who would lose (or are losing) their jobs are those who would manage the people providing services that GPs commissioned.

It's a political quagmire and how there aren't calls for Lansley's head after the vote of no confidence - given that he worked on the Health and Social Care Bill for 7 years and it's cost i.e. meeting with nurses, Doctors, service users, patients etc and it failed - I don't know.

daviesee

I my view it depends (as always with generalisations).

1. Have they been promoted or hired to/at a level that they deserve on their way up the corporate ladder?

or

2. Have they been promoted to get them out of the way/trouble?

I believe that the stereotype belongs to answer 2.

lovepasty

Its the Peter principle I think its called

People do a good a job, get promoted, do another good job, get promoted again as so it goes on until they get to a position that is beyond them & can no longer succeed at their job. Hence lots of people in large organisations are working at one level too high for their capabilities

I

notsoblue

daviesee wrote:

I my view it depends (as always with generalisations).

1. Have they been promoted or hired to/at a level that they deserve on their way up the corporate ladder?

or

2. Have they been promoted to get them out of the way/trouble?

I believe that the stereotype belongs to answer 2.

If you find yourself working for a company who does that, its time to start polishing your CV.

DonDaddyD

Il Principe wrote:

Passing on bad news and not toeing the company line is bad management IMHO 'oh it's not my fault, balme the directors' etc. People to weak to challenge their managers shouldn't be managing themselves. Challenge is positive if backed up by evidence and alternatives.

Oh I agree, but its how you go about it. I will always support and defend my staff. When they've done something wrong it's dealth with privately. I'm not into name and shame as given the personality type, this would simply demotivate them.

If I need to defend the position, treatment of a staff member or I have seen an action made by a senior manager or a decision by the Directors has been taken that I disagree with. I afford them the same respect I do my staff and deal with it privately. If it is an issue a staff member has asked me to take up, then I will feed back to them as much as professionally appropriate.

The ability to manage upwards and downwards. Good managers have this skill (amongst others) IMO.

Unfortunately many senior managers are not actually very good people managers, they set the culture and tone of an organisation. If they are not effective leaders/managers most managers underneath them will struggle...

AND

An aside: Sadly many people who become managers are either given no training, or training so bad that it has a negative effect.

I agree. I struggle with these types the most to be honest.

daviesee

notsoblue wrote:

daviesee wrote:

I my view it depends (as always with generalisations).

1. Have they been promoted or hired to/at a level that they deserve on their way up the corporate ladder?

or

2. Have they been promoted to get them out of the way/trouble?

I believe that the stereotype belongs to answer 2.

If you find yourself working for a company who does that, its time to start polishing your CV.

Checking my CV, I have worked for 15 companies. I can think of at least one person in each one who fits that stereotype very well. A job is just a stopping off point in the course of your career IMHO. Nobody thinks they will have a job for life any more. Do they?

CyclingBantam

DonDaddyD wrote:

CyclingBantam wrote:

Is the problem not with how middle managers behave as opposed to the actual fact they are middle managers?

I work for a very, very large organisation just below the 'middle management' level. I get very frustrated when you see management simply passing on bad news messages from the top but then claiming they don't agree with it either to appear the good guy.

They will never challenge senior management so you end up looking at them as nothing more than a messanger./

This seems a bit naive to me. What do you expect them to do.

1). It's there job to do so and doing their job is considered professional.

2). How do you know they haven't voiced their views privately with senior management. it may not be appropriate or more to the point its unprofessional to openly disagree with senior management infront of other staff.

There are many decisions I disagree with, I always raise my concerns privately and I am respected for doing so.

There is no point in getting in to the specifics of the descisions. You don't know me or the organisation so it would be a pointless excetcise but you will just have to assume, for the sake of the debate what I am saying is truthful.

If you say you are respected for challenging, where appropriate then they obviously know you have challenged. I know 'some' of my bosses don't. The good ones do. That is what I was getting at.

CyclingBantam

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Passing on bad news and not toeing the company line is bad management IMHO 'oh it's not my fault, balme the directors' etc. People to weak to challenge their managers shouldn't be managing themselves. Challenge is positive if backed up by evidence and alternatives.

Oh I agree, but its how you go about it. I will always support and defend my staff. When they've done something wrong it's dealth with privately. I'm not into name and shame as given the personality type, this would simply demotivate them.

If I need to defend the position, treatment of a staff member or I have seen an action made by a senior manager or a decision by the Directors has been taken that I disagree with. I afford them the same respect I do my staff and deal with it privately. If it is an issue a staff member has asked me to take up, then I will feed back to them as much as professionally appropriate.

The ability to manage upwards and downwards. Good managers have this skill (amongst others) IMO.

Unfortunately many senior managers are not actually very good people managers, they set the culture and tone of an organisation. If they are not effective leaders/managers most managers underneath them will struggle...

AND

An aside: Sadly many people who become managers are either given no training, or training so bad that it has a negative effect.

I agree. I struggle with these types the most to be honest.

Now I see you are a middle manager. Did you get those bits out of a book...

DonDaddyD

CyclingBantam wrote:

I work for a very, very large organisation just below the 'middle management' level. I get very frustrated when you see management simply passing on bad news messages from the top but then claiming they don't agree with it either to appear the good guy.

They will never challenge senior management so you end up looking at them as nothing more than a messanger.

And

CyclingBantam wrote:

There is no point in getting in to the specifics of the descisions. You don't know me or the organisation so it would be a pointless excetcise but you will just have to assume, for the sake of the debate what I am saying is truthful.

If you say you are respected for challenging, where appropriate then they obviously know you have challenged. I know 'some' of my bosses don't. The good ones do. That is what I was getting at.

Point I'm making is that a lot of the 'challenging' my happen behind close doors and be something you are not privvy to. But the line manager, for the sake of being professional, may have to carry out his duties in a fashion that exudes 'unified front'.

CyclingBantam

Point i'm making is it doesn't.

You can either assume I am telling the truth and I know my company slightly better than you do.

or

you know better than I do and I am therefore not allowed to contribute any more!

Seriously though, you asked the question why they are not always popular. I gave you my opinion as to why they are sometimes not. You can't really disagree with my opinion. It's mine.... so get off!

DonDaddyD

CyclingBantam wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Passing on bad news and not toeing the company line is bad management IMHO 'oh it's not my fault, balme the directors' etc. People to weak to challenge their managers shouldn't be managing themselves. Challenge is positive if backed up by evidence and alternatives.

Oh I agree, but its how you go about it. I will always support and defend my staff. When they've done something wrong it's dealth with privately. I'm not into name and shame as given the personality type, this would simply demotivate them.

If I need to defend the position, treatment of a staff member or I have seen an action made by a senior manager or a decision by the Directors has been taken that I disagree with. I afford them the same respect I do my staff and deal with it privately. If it is an issue a staff member has asked me to take up, then I will feed back to them as much as professionally appropriate.

The ability to manage upwards and downwards. Good managers have this skill (amongst others) IMO.

Unfortunately many senior managers are not actually very good people managers, they set the culture and tone of an organisation. If they are not effective leaders/managers most managers underneath them will struggle...

AND

An aside: Sadly many people who become managers are either given no training, or training so bad that it has a negative effect.

I agree. I struggle with these types the most to be honest.

Now I see you are a middle manager. Did you get those bits out of a book...

Not really a middle manager as my job - see my very lengthy post to big Mat is operational first line management second.

I probably did get that stuff out of a book when I was studying my GCSE's, it's all pretty basic fundamentals. Self taught common sense really.

Now motivational/behavioural theory that's where it begins to get interesting.

rolf_f

It's probably as high a level as you can usually get to, if you want it enough, without necessarily having any competence.

That doesn't help the image. Also, it tends to grate that it is usually middle managers who chose where the cuts are to be made - and funnily enough, they never choose themselves; the least useful tier of the organisation.