By Tony DeMasi, editor
ome employees are real pains in the pants, right? Do you have any? If so,
think about it one more time. Are those employees really the problem,
or is the problem really you? A new report by Maritz Poll is an eye opener
when it comes to managerial styles. It states that hard-driving bosses
may appear to successfully affect the bottom line. However, it is actually supervisors
who are honest, caring, cheerful, generous, and flexible that do the best
job motivating employees to deliver great service and therefore create greater customer
loyalty.
care?
The study’s findings divided managers into six types. Which type are you?
Caring Mentors (26 percent of employees have this type of supervisor).
This manager is highly relational and greatly appreciated by direct reports.
They genuinely care about their people. They are cheerful, generous, friendly,
and flexible. People are their most important priority at the workplace.
While some might fear that being too “caring” about employees is a negative
for a manager, it is clear that this type of supervisor facilitates the most satisfied
and committed employees.
Employees that serve under this type of manager have the strongest affinity
for customers. Employees under this type of manager rate their companies best
on having a strong customer focus.
Employees serving under this type of manager are the most likely to stay with
the company long term, as well as the most likely to recommend it to others.
Respectable Professional (29 percent of employees have this type of boss).
The most common supervisor type falls under the Respectable Professional
category, with nearly three out of 10 respondents (29 percent) working for this
type of supervisor.
While not the most effective boss type, the Respectable Professional does garner
positive reviews from most respondents.
This boss is highly task driven and conducts business operations without a
great deal of personal involvement, but employees view them with respect, while
identifying attributes such as honesty and reliability.
Only 4 percent of those with this supervisor type would fire him or her if they
could.
Win-At-Any-Cost (19 percent of employees have this type of supervisor).
These supervisors are tough, controlling, and ruthless. Worse yet, they are
not seen as honest, ethical, or intelligent by their direct reports.
Direct reports do not indicate respect for these bosses, seeing them as “inconsistent”
and “clueless.”
Not surprisingly, these managers have the lowest employee engagement
among all supervisor types. They are seen as being strictly out for themselves.
Seventy-one percent with this supervisor would fire him or her if they could.
Taskmaster/Taskmistress (10 percent of employees have this type of supervisor).
This boss is tough, controlling, and task-driven. However, unlike the Win-
At-Any-Cost manager, the Taskmaster rates higher on both ethics and competence.
This is a “Type A” personality; not cheerful or
peaceful, but more focused on achieving goals.
Driving productivity is a top priority for this manager.
This supervisor is not seen as particularly effective
or ineffective. They are preferred to the Win-At-Any-
Cost manager but certainly do not engender much in
the way of employee loyalty. Their direct reports see
them “in the middle” with respect to how they serve
customers. In short, people do not “hate” them as
much, but do not particularly respond to their leadership
style either.
Interestingly, only 18 percent would fire these bosses
if they could.
Likeable Loser (9 percent of employees have this type of supervisor).
Although wholesome and charming, the Likeable
Loser is viewed as incompetent, inconsistent, and clueless.
Employees simply do not respect this supervisor
type, and ratings are midrange, similar to those who
report to a Taskmaster/Taskmistress.
Glad Handler (7 percent of employees have this type of boss). The Glad Handler is a friendlier version of the
Win-At-Any-Cost manager, but is still rated the second
worst type of manager.
Despite being friendly and flexible, they are recognized
as dishonest, unreliable, clueless, and uncaring.
Their approach to business is more ingratiating
than the Win-At-Any-Cost and Taskmaster/Taskmistress
individuals, but they are just as ineffective as
these two types.
Service or Shame?
The souvenir industry is experiencing some brouhaha
over vendors selling “9/11” souvenirs. Technically,
vendors are barred from doing business at Ground
Zero and the Tribute WTC Visitor Center, but they
are getting away with it because law enforcement is lax.
The vendors, with their makeshift tables, are chased
away a few times a day but keep coming back. The vendors
argue that they are providing a service since the
tourists want to buy figurines of the towers, post cards
of the burning buildings, etc. One vendor said he
makes about 300 sales a day. What do you think?
Should such vendors be allowed? Is it in poor taste to
sell souvenirs reminiscent of “9/11?” How should the
government handle it? Send your reply to me at tonydem@juno.com.
|
