Why Line Managers Hold the Power to Transform Organizations

Dr. Jim: [: 00:00:00

We remember those great leaders that we worked for time passes, and then we get. Promoted. And then what happens? We forget every single thing we've learned from those great managers. Why does that happen? In a lot of instances, it happens because we expect people to become great through osmosis. And that's definitely the case in a lot of organizations when it comes to equipping their line managers for success.

We allocate all of our development resources at the highest tiers of organizations and leave our line managers to flounder around in the dark. We need to fundamentally rethink how we're developing our leaders. Those are just a few things that Bernard Coleman has on his mind when he thinks about building high performance teams.

[: 00:01:00

He's a thought leader and influencer of impactful HR practices. He supports business objectives and collaborates with cross functional leaders to identify future skill and talent needs as well as acts as a thought partner to the CEO and CEO on how to advance swing education's mission, vision, values and strategy.

sity, belonging, equity, and [: 00:02:00

He was instrumental in helping evolve Uber's culture in addition to his work at high growth startups, he's been involved with the Hillary Clinton for America campaign as the first ever chief diversity and human resources officer for any presidential campaign for either political party. And he's spent a long time working within a political circles throughout his career. He's been featured in Forbes, Catalyst, Sherm, Time, TechCrunch, HuffPo, you name it, Bernard's probably been featured in that.

Bernard Coleman, welcome to the show.

Bernard Coleman: Thank you, Dr. Jim. I appreciate the that warm welcome. Glad to be here with you today.

Dr. Jim: If I'm thinking about all the guests that we've interviewed, you're probably bringing one of the more unique perspectives to the show. And I think that gives us a nice springboard to talk a little bit more about. The lens that you view the world.

he meat of the discussion is [: 00:03:00

Bernard Coleman: What is really helpful to inform my kind of like my my leadership worldview is I worked in politics for the 1st Larger portion of my career. So I was up close to leaders every day, leaders of the House of Representatives. So I got to see them up close. What leadership abilities I thought were great.

And it was just interesting to see what is leadership,. And through the political lens. And then when you think about it through moving into tech it looks very different. And so I just, I felt like I've had the unique perspective to watch leaders and

And that's typically what I [: 00:04:00

So I think yeah. That's how my leadership philosophy came to be.

Dr. Jim: One of the things that I find particularly interesting about your background is the difference in pacing among all those different organizations that you've worked at. When you look at the pacing within state and federal governments, when you look at pacing within political campaign organizations, compare that to pacing at high growth startups, you're talking about pretty distinct paces within those organizations.

What took you by surprise when you're looking and evaluating leadership style and adjusting for pace within the organization? Were there any trends that stood out that you thought were interesting?

Bernard Coleman: So when I worked in on campaigns it's very similar to startup in the sense of it's scrappy. You have to be really quick about things. You don't have a lot of time to respond. Obviously you want to be thoughtful and intentional, but it's very fast paced state government.

On the [: 00:05:00

Campaigns, it's finite, when it's going to end, you have to move quickly. Otherwise, you might not be in. Contention anymore with startups. It's a little different because they're, I won't say there's an insight, but there's milestones that there's periods and sprints that you have to go towards.

And so I found there was a lot of similarity between a campaign and a startup. The only difference is the finality campaign when you move off and go to the next thing with startups, there'll be this big thing. Maybe it's a launch. Maybe it's an IPO. But it's very much, you have to be scrappy. You have to move quickly and you have to be really agile. What leaders can actually handle and what altitudes they can fly. That's, what's been most fascinating and understanding to apply that altitude leading to go fly. Hello. Do you need to fly medium? I do need to fly high.

ed the concepts of levels of [: 00:06:00

In the political realm, everything is filtered through the lens of optics. How is this going to impact our constituency or what's the messaging going to look like? And when you look at high growth startups, the focus on impact and being iterative and advancing whatever that mission is to that next step.

What did you notice about striking the appropriate balance between optics and impacts that served you well.

eople remember that you were [: 00:07:00

I think in tech, it's very, you're moving so fast. You really have to understand the language, how fast they move, what the objectives are. And so the way of politics is, I don't think it really applies. I think also because in a hybrid startup talent is such a commodity that you can move very quickly.

You can stay at a job a year and move to the next job, and you'll never see those people again. So it's the relationship that you were building in politics don't necessarily translate to, I think, the world of technology. I think it's impact, it's value and adding that immediately and then being able to move the pace of change.

So I think that's the difference. It's less relationship based. It's almost a little bit more transactional. Because the goals are different, right? Constituencies, voters political campaigns, and all the different things that are might be in your platform are very different from a product you're trying to launch the market share that you're trying to advance into.

mbination of things, but the [: 00:08:00

Dr. Jim: That's fair. When you're looking at life in a high growth startup, and you're trying to apply a talent strategy what you described seems very moment to moment. How do you build a cohesive talent strategy when you have such immediacy in the pacing within a high growth startup?

Bernard Coleman: I think the most important thing is what's the order of implementation? What are you going to do? 1st, 2nd, 3rd? I think that goes without saying, but a lot of times. You could boil the ocean trying to do all the right things, the best practices, so you really do have to say, what are you going to do first?

When are you going to do 2nd? What are you going to do? 3rd? And it's a mix of short term, medium term, long term goals that you want to get done and I think coming into any environment. 1 of my mentors said to me if we're speaking about the pace of change, you don't want to introduce so much change that it causes disruption.

've effectively managed your [: 00:09:00

You're saying what you're going to go do and you're controlling the pace of change, as opposed to allowing the tail to wag the dog, right? You do have to define what you're going to do, deliver on those things and go after the next things that are on your list. Otherwise you're putting yourselves in this doomsday cycle where you're.

Undelivering and you over promise. So you really have to manage those expectations and move at the pace of change and then also be prepared to change. So let's say the thing you prioritize was key a month ago. Now might not be, but being prepared to pivot and bringing the team along on that pivot.

So that way they don't swirl going to swirl and can't manage to the change. Because 1 thing I found working in tech, it's always this change. It's a change is a constant. So you just have to get used to that. It firstly feels uncomfortable, but once you get used to it you're less wedded to what you wanted to do.

And this, you're just ready and agile and ready for those moments.

iling the ocean and becoming [: 00:10:00

Where do organizations often go wrong in what they prioritize and how they communicate, ?

Bernard Coleman: Yeah, I think what's important is qualifying it. So a lot of times people say, okay, I know what I want to change and then they take it to the audience, but they haven't thought throughout the mechanics of what that change entails. All the people might involve, both. How people might react to it. We always talk about change management.

What does change management look like? But there's some ordered steps to it. It's 1st, who do you tell about this change? You want to get by and you want to make sure people feel good about the change. You want to get their input. So the more amenable to doing these changes you're asking.

er audience and you let them [: 00:11:00

It should be asking there, there should be a who, what, when, where and why. So that way, everyone understands. Why we're doing it, where we're going, what their role is in this change or this rollout. And then so everyone's more or less aligned. And then you can hold people accountable to those changes because everyone knows their partner, you got their buy in.

And so they're more apt to do the things you're asking them to do. And then you have to deliver. So now like you have to institute let's say quarter one, we said we're going to do X widgets and then Y widgets in quarter two, you still have to deliver and report back. Just because I've seen a lot of things go poorly where.

We roll it out, we announced it, and we don't revisit it. We don't even touch it. So you go, what was that for? And I think you lose kind of bit of you lose trust in that process. And you just what was that just busy work? Why do we do that? So I think it's really just bringing people along in the journey.

And then if you can manage those expectations I'm not going to say change is handled. Perfectly, but it's definitely handled better.

line level leaders is their [: 00:12:00

Unfortunately. It's very rare for people to build that skill, organically. And when you look at organizations and a lot of dysfunction that happens within those organizations is due to breakdown at that line manager level. How is that related to some of the things that you've seen throughout your career cracks the code of building high performance teams ?

Bernard Coleman: Yeah. It's like that game telephone. We were kids, you'd say something in one person's ear. And by the time it gets back to the initial messenger, the message is garbled. It doesn't even make sense to what was initially shared. And I think that's what happens on companies, right? So the executive level, they're quite clear on what they want.

They've discussed it. They spent the most time with it. And then when they start to convey it to the rest of the company it doesn't translate as intended, right? Things get either misunderstood, misconstrued, and then you wonder why you can't execute. And I think it's because people don't take the time.

They [: 00:13:00

They say, Hey, Bernard, this is why we're doing X. The outcomes we expect to see would be why your part in this is this and I want you to structure your day around that. And then I knew clearly what I stood. I knew clearly what I need to do and how I contribute to the larger mission, but it made it crystal clear in terms of, like, how am I contributed to this effort?

Because I'm not going to say it was command and control is more. I've given you the outer boundaries. You're painting within those boundaries to make you more effective. And I think we don't spend that enough time really explaining our rationale as to why and qualify and what we're going to do.

It's not to say you have to defend your work. But I think if you give people more of the that prep work up front, they're more likely to go do what you need them to do. As opposed to I was unclear. Now you're coming back to me asking more and more questions when I could have this been more comprehensive in my answer at the onset.

So I think [: 00:14:00

So every manager I've ever had that where we've really succeeded, they brought me into the conversation and made me see exactly what I needed to do.

Dr. Jim: So it's interesting that you mentioned not only the clarification of what needs to be done, but also the followup components. Those seem pretty basic. I'm curious to get your insight into why more often than not, those sort of conversations. Are left to chance. Why is such a basic step ignored?

Bernard Coleman: I don't know. I think people just need to make some uniformity, right? Let's say there's a big initiative, effective kickoff. When I'll use an example. One time I was doing an adversary report, the kickoff brought in everyone who might be involved, whether I need you on day one on day 300.

or what I'm going to ask of [: 00:15:00

I need someone to lay the foundation. So it's really helping people organize and understand where they come in. So I think the 1st thing is an effective kickoff. So that's managing expectations and where people should be then to. Conducting meetings that creates the follow up, right? So there's a project plan, or maybe there's a, a project brief under helping people understand their pieces with the actual goal is what those milestones and critical moments are, and then checking in and holding people to it.

And that way again, if the back to the example of fabricating a building, Yeah. Everyone's coming in when they need to construct what you're trying to construct. I think a lot of times it's not the follow through isn't there. And then I think the second part is the reactive piece.

o I think it's balancing the [: 00:16:00

Dr. Jim: So I want to pull on that a little bit more and we've had this conversation offline where i've posed this question to several executive leaders how important is it to have highly effective line managers? And just about everybody says, Oh it's so critical. And then when I follow up why isn't it done more often?

You and I were talking about this offline and you mentioned two big issues. Executive leaders and senior leaders don't have time to invest at the line manager level. And then the other thing that you've mentioned is that it isn't really seen as valued and.

I'd like your perspective on why those two objections or bottlenecks exist, because the downstream impact of having really effective line managers is so obvious. It surprises me that executives and senior leaders don't really readjust their priorities to focus at that.

Bernard Coleman: I [: 00:17:00

If I had questions. They would carve out extra time to make sure that I was set up for success. And so I think I get more leverage from my team if I make more time for them. So that goes to the prep work. If I prep them and I get them ready. They give me more leverage as a result because they're better equipped to handle what I'm going to give them a little later on.

And that's why you have to prioritize,. After hiring people, you leave them to their own devices. They're not going to get through osmosis. You have to develop them. You have to pour into them. You have to share some of your best practices because many times when people join companies, they did join a work with that leader.

Like the mission of the company matters, the impact you're going to have in the world. But look, a lot of times you join a company to work with that particular boss because you're hoping to learn something from them. It's a give and take relationship. So you have to prioritize it. I try to work it into my teams with development plans.

o that way. It's this mutual [: 00:18:00

And I think it's also important to value it. I think a lot of times we don't see, even though we appreciate it as a recipient for my manager to be investing in me, when we deal with our teams, for whatever reason, it's not valued as much as it should be. But I think having, being an excellent coach is extremely valuable to To your staff, it helps people stay on board.

They don't leave because they're growing so much. They're learning so much. They want to stay. So I think it's a huge unlock. If people really take the time to do it.

Dr. Jim: I like your point about the importance of coaching when it comes to building that capability in your managers.

Tell me a little bit about how that actually can free up senior leaders and executives to do higher value work. If they're investing time in developing their managers to be better coaches.

impact work that you have to [: 00:19:00

If I have to then come in and manage your work in such a hands on way, then I'm not able to do the strategic work that is required of me. And it becomes, I become stretched. So it's really about, again, if you want to help build this person up. If you are then enabling them, empowering them, equipping them, like if it's resources, if it's training that additional time, if it's 15 minutes, 20 minutes a day, or each one on one to one, you've enabled them and empower them to take on more in terms of the professional real estate that they're doing.

So that way they give you more leverage. You're getting time back as a result. And so what I've done is. I really try to invest in my folks, particularly at onset. So let's say it's a newly formed team. I want to know what your strengths are. I want to know what your weaknesses are. Maybe it's Myers Briggs.

te a better development plan.[: 00:20:00

And so once you're more equipped. And I know you got it. I can back away. You have the widgets. You're going to handle that. You're going to deliver on this. I can spend more time on the FY 24 planning so I can deliver this for the business and then provide the structure and the OKRs and the KPIs for the rest of the team.

But if you don't do that, it's almost creating this vicious cycle where they're regularly coming to the boss, asking them to solve their problems rather than self solving. And so you're also, you're creating this crutch, if you will, on your own team of making you be the center of it. When you really actually want them to go out and be autonomous and grow and get empowered and take on and develop new skills as opposed to coming to you.

instead of empowering us to [: 00:21:00

So it's a delicate balance. But I think if you can equip your folks. It frees you up so much. I've had some teams where I like, I poured everything I had into them and it allowed me to do the critical actions I needed to do. And it was just and they appreciate it because they knew that I invested in them.

It was a mutually beneficial effort and it can work quite well.

Dr. Jim: A lot of what you said is really powerful, but there's one aspect of it that. I think I want to emphasize a little bit. So when we're talking about technical teams and we're talking about an implementation project, oftentimes, if you're in a vendor customer relationship, customers always want a single throat to choke.

gs done, that's problematic. [: 00:22:00

Bernard Coleman: I think leaders have put themselves at the center. Everything create a single point of failure, . What I've seen happen is and I can answer directly answer your question is when I'm at the center of things, peers, colleagues will go to that person because they know they get it done.

Maybe that's the leader instead of empowering their team to say, I thank you for bringing it to me. You should take it to X person or Y person. I'm basically redirecting like a conductor go to you. Maria, go to John, go to Steve, go to Phyllis. So that way those who are coming to me recognize I've empowered these folks in my team to adequately address whatever it is you're seeking.

u have to come to me instead [: 00:23:00

You have to be able to trust your team because why, after all, did you hire them to not do their piece? So I think when people put themselves in the middle of it there's ways to stay informed. You can look and, use whatever systems you have to see are they okay? I was moving the way they should move, but you shouldn't put yourself at the center of you should empower your team to address those different pieces.

And then if people keep trying to come to you say redirect to that person who is the point person for that said initiative. I think that's you're also modeling and mirroring what you want from the organization. I'm modeling that. You should trust my team. I expect my team to mirror to take those going to take it by the bull by the horn to go do what they need to do.

And again, it frees me up to go do the strategic work that I need to do a lot of that's predicated by what the leader does and the team will respond in kind.

about how one on one should [: 00:24:00

Unfortunately, a lot of one on ones are used as. Status updates or project updates instead of actual development opportunities. What can senior leaders and executive leaders do to better structure their one on one? So it's more focused on development rather than status updates?

Bernard Coleman: I've played around a lot with this in terms of feedback and how do you encourage that? So I, at one organization, I did this thing called the feedback five, the first five to 10 minutes, just us giving each other feedback. And it wasn't a one way thing. It's also to create. For them to give me feedback as well.

So the whole point of that is one, I wanna establish trust with my team so that way not only am I giving you feedback, you can feel empowered to give me feedback. A lot of times we talk about psychological safety and what does that mean And I think a lot of times people weaponize psychological safety.

But the whole point I want for my team is you can trust me to give this feedback. 'cause I wanna grow as a leader. And I want, I think your feedback's valuable to me is if I in that endeavor. But that way, also, I can give them the feedback and they know, hey, this is not a place of trust. I know you're ambitious.

e successful. I'm giving you [: 00:25:00

What do you want? What do you want to achieve over the next six months? And so when you take the time to really get to know somebody, maybe you've done the strength finders, the MBTI, the Myers Briggs edit, Myers Briggs, so I know your strengths, your weaknesses places you over index where you're under index.

I know your communication profile. I know your preferences. Then I also know what you want to get from this Company from this relationship professionally, and then I'm building in time to actually talk about those things. And the reason I think this is important, it really does. It creates a quality assurance and in the moment.

So I doing the feedback 5, I'm giving you feedback in the moment. So it's just it's moderate improvements. You're making along the way versus, sometimes it'll be like performance reviews. 6 months have gone by. We have not talked about it and I'm unloading on you. It makes it very difficult for me to take the corrective actions to get on course to either grow professionally maybe there's something I'm not doing.

hance because I have this is [: 00:26:00

So I think it's really about it's ordered steps and being consistent.

Dr. Jim: Your point about consistency is really important because I think a lot of organizations and a lot of leaders don't. Have those feedback mechanisms built in with enough repetitions for it to be meaningful. I'll often ask leaders what's their current performance management or review process.

And they'll say we'll do it twice a year. And really, if you're looking at making any sort of incremental change at the individual level, to formalize sets of feedback periods, isn't going to be enough to have meaningful changes. And in fact, if that's the only time that you're actually talking about this stuff.

ar. I'm pretty interested in [: 00:27:00

How do we fix that? How would you advise other senior leaders to create space and resourcing and availability for those line level managers to become much more effective than they are and shorten that learning curve so that they're being much more effective in building their teams?

Bernard Coleman: It's a package of things. So I do think you want to get that professional development template just to understand who do they want to be when they grow up? So how you can align their interest in terms of the goals that you have for the company and for themselves and make those two intersect.

And then two, you want to carve out time. In your one to ones, either in your one to ones or have a specific touch point within. Let's say you do a one to one every week. Maybe one of those one to ones in that given month is just for development. And that way you're having a constant conversation.

, you get the performance of [: 00:28:00

Because they have to still take the initiative to grow. So they should go and do. Is it a conference? Is it a world at work? Is it a H. R. transform? But what are what is the venue where you're going to go grow? And those are H. R. specific. But what are you doing to go grow your craft? And then the other thing is.

You want to then model it like this is what I'm doing to grow. I think sometimes people feel like they need a permission or an example. Let's say I have an executive coach or a leadership coach. I'm working with them to grow my own capabilities. I don't have all the answers. I think it's making them feel okay to grow in this regard and recognizing Growth is a continuum.

like, how are we growing our [: 00:29:00

This is important. If your organization is big enough, I think having a learning management system where you can actually help them grow and learn is super helpful because that way, like you're creating a learning and development culture as opposed to We care about your learning and development when you got here, but then when you get here, it's not, it doesn't matter so much.

I think if you can encourage folks to keep growing that they know that value can be developed internally, as opposed to I need to bring all the value to get me hired as opposed to then that that values and no longer valued when you're once you're on board, because I. I've grappled with this and thinking about, listen, I went to all the best universities in the world.

That shouldn't end there. The education and growth process should continue at work. So I think it's multifaceted, but I think it's putting all those things in place, helping that growth.

are allocated at the highest [: 00:30:00

At the manager level. So if I'm a manager who wants to go to a conference or who wants to invest in a coach, oftentimes I'm left to my own devices for doing that.

What are some of the things that you would argue managers need to be bringing to the table so that they aren't coming out of pocket for some of these development needs that they have to, to advance their career.

Bernard Coleman: Yeah, that's interesting. I used to work at the society for human resource management and I believe. It was section 127 under the IRS code, which allowed for a 5, 000 at the time reimbursement towards educational needs. So Sherm would front us the money, but they would get reimbursed. I think through the IRS process.

the not only the company to [: 00:31:00

So I think you have to get creative, right? A lot of times you can possibly write some of this stuff off and encourage people to go get their education and pursue it without it breaking the bank. So that's one in real life example where I use that 5, 000 for two years running to help pay for help to defer a cost of my MBA.

I think the other ways are guided learning paths. We will give a certain amount of money that contributes to the company's bottom line by taking these learning paths. So I think it goes, it falls to the HR team, but defining what those learning paths should be, how it's beneficial for this person growing enroll.

So then it's helping to deepen the investment. I think the argument could be made is this person is this much more valuable because they have gotten this SPHR or whatever credential. That was empowered by the organization. So that way, we didn't have to go out and hire someone. We built this panel this internally.

uantify how much it costs to [: 00:32:00

So I think there's a lot of ways to qualify it. To pay for it. You just have to get creative. And then again, go with them on the journey to hold them accountable. Like you said, you're going to go do this. You took this class took this course. How's that showing up in your work? You have to reaffirm it.

Dr. Jim: I wasn't even aware of the tax implications on on development and how that can be leveraged. So that was pretty important. I like your point about growing your own talent. And I think a lot of organizations and a lot of leaders ignore that at their peril because they're often finding themselves going to market after somebody has left and paying 30, 40, 50 percent more to bring that Talent in versus spending that time to develop that on their own.

So [: 00:33:00

Bernard Coleman: I think 1st is if you empower the frontline managers 1, it makes them. Be better equipped to handle anything that might be thrown their way. It gives you, if you're the senior leader, more leverage that way, you can focus on the things you need to focus on because the shop is in good shape and they can go run with the things that you've given them.

So it goes to investment. I think another like benefit that people don't think about is I'm more loyal because I'm growing at the company. I see opportunities for me to like. Get this credential, get this new responsibility also for succession planning. Leaders aren't going to stay forever. No one stays forever.

If I have an extension [: 00:34:00

If you really care about doing a good job, you don't want to destabilize the business. You want to enhance it. And I think the other part is a net promoter score. I think people. Who are loyal to their companies. They had those. I had a man drag run through the wall for I was able to grow. I was able to learn.

I was able to contribute. I think those things really matter. And add to the larger employee engagement. You want to have a good employee engager score and a good employee experience. All those things add to that. So I think when you, I think the arc is make these investments now and often be consistent.

Hold your people accountable to the, what they said they wanted to do, and then give yourself more leverage by investing in your people.

people want to continue the [: 00:35:00

Bernard Coleman: You can find me on LinkedIn, Bernard Coleman on LinkedIn. And then if you're interested in what I'm talking about, I write our article a month on ink and you could just let me have Bernard Coleman is the columns called culture code. So either of those two places, feel free to reach out.

Dr. Jim: Appreciate you hanging out. And when I think about the conversation that we've had I think the idea of investing in your line level managers is often a forgotten concept or an ignored concept within organizational effectiveness.

And. It's always struck me as pretty interesting because when you think about the biggest reasons why people join or leave organizations, and you mentioned this yourself, it's often The manager that has the biggest role to play in that churn that happens at the line level. So the idea that organizations aren't investing heavily at the line manager level has always confused me a little bit as far as a missed opportunity.

ut building high performance [: 00:36:00

The big lesson for everybody listening. Is that if you really want to build a high performing team, a lot of that effort needs to be focused on creating really strong management tiers at the line level, because they have the biggest impact on the people that are doing the work.

conversation, we appreciate [: 00:37:00

You can find that at engage rocket. co slash HR impact, and then tune in next time where we'll have another great leader sharing with us their game changing insights that help them build a high performing team.