Management gemsFind here some gems from our monitoring of the best publications on leadership and management

At the time of taking on a new position, and especially an executive one, you have probably already been astonished by the assumptions that your interlocutors may have had about you. Sometimes, even the gaze of the people you already know can change in a disconcerting way!

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recounts this phenomenon and the way in which he dealt with it, with accents of sincerity that are rare in politics. His maturity on the subject comes from a very particular childhood, as his father was himself Prime Minister at the time. He thus quickly discovered that a child in his class could tell him from the very first meeting that they did not like him because, in their family, no one voted for Pierre Elliott Trudeau—and that, during his father’s meetings, he was acclaimed by a crowd that knew nothing about him… He thus realized at a precocious age that others would have preconceived ideas about him, no matter what he did—and had to learn to detach himself from this.

Having himself risen to the highest office, he retained this reflex of always questioning the image that others reflected back of him. What elements, well-founded and constructive, should be retained from criticisms? And what should be believed from the praise? A permanent effort to remain clear-headed, which will inspire anyone taking on new responsibilities.

Source : Leadership lessons from the prime minister of Canada, interview of Justin Trudeau by Adam Grant, TED, May 2024.

Almost everyone hates being “micromanaged”: this managerial posture, perceived as demeaning and disempowering, is a source of disengagement. The fight against micromanagement is thus on everyone’s mind.

On the other hand, there is less discussion of the opposite extreme, as management coach Victor Lipman underlines: a growing proportion of managers do not manage! Because they want to be liked, for fear of conflict, or to save their energy, they allow their teams to move forward as they see fit. This behavior often goes unnoticed, because these managers are appreciated and are often effective performers themselves. But the impact on collective results is inevitably felt.

Lipman insists: it is above all a question of will, more than of aptitude. To avoid this pitfall of under-management, managers can ask themselves three fundamental questions:

– Am I prepared to face disagreements and conflicts, unavoidable in any collective?

– Is setting objectives truly at the heart of my mission as a manager, and do I devote sufficient time to it?

– How can my team and I do better and continue to move forward?

Source : Under-Management Is the Flip Side of Micromanagement — and It’s a Problem Too, Victor Lipman, Harvard Business Review, November 2018.

A study by the McKinsey Center for CEO Excellence estimates that 45% of a company’s performance can be attributed to the CEO’s influence. Hence the importance of evaluating the performance of those who hold this position.

The study drew on a self-assessment questionnaire, to establish the strengths and shortcomings perceived by the CEOs themselves. One area for improvement is clearly identified by the vast majority of them: interactions with their board of directors. Only 30% of the surveyed CEOs consider their board of directors to be effective! Relations with directors are good, but the CEOs struggle to take advantage of their individual skills. Their added value is often restricted to financial considerations and market relations. But directors can provide valuable assistance on strategic or operational questions. All that is required is knowing how to ask them.

An invitation to accompany CEOs, from the moment they take up their role, to broaden their perception of this governance body’s strategic value.

Source : CEO excellence: How do leaders assess their own performance?, Gautam Kumra, Joydeep Sengupta, Mukund Sridhar, McKinsey & Company, February 2024.

Decisions that rely on artificial intelligence (AI) have the particularity that we are not aware of the logical sequence that resulted in the recommended solution. Added to this is the use of statistical learning methods: “deep learning” rests on correlations between millions, or even billions, of parameters, which cannot be translated into explicit causal links.

And yet, in order to grant our trust, we require explanations. Isabelle Bloch, a professor at Sorbonne University, stresses the essential role of human beings in this regard. It is indeed a question of identifying how to judiciously compensate for the algorithm’s opacity, according to each specific case. The challenge is above all to choose the type of explanation to provide, depending on needs and the people we are addressing. Are we dealing primarily with an issue of trust, of ethics, of responsibility? What is our interlocutors’ level of understanding of AI? For example, we might choose to explain what are the data used, the operating principles of the AI used, the precautions to be taken when using its results, etc. Thus, the more AI develops, the more we will need to develop our ability to communicate about and discuss its results. A new skill set to be explored.

Source: Il faut justifier les décisions prises par un algorithme [Decisions taken by an algorithm need to be justified], interview of Isabelle Bloch by Sophy Caulier, Polytechnique Insights, December 2021.

Employees’ mental health appears to be at an all-time low. In its special report on the subject, France Culture interviewed Thomas Périlleux, a Belgian sociologist and winner of the 2024 Penser le travail prize for his book Le Travail à vif [Work on edge].

One of his observations is particularly interesting: often, he writes, what causes an employee who has been enduring a difficult situation for months to “snap” is a contradictory injunction. The problem is not that there are contradictions within a company; those are inherent to its very operation. The problem is that we are strongly encouraged to keep quiet about them.

Employees are thus asked to “do things faster and better at the same time”, to “get more involved in their work while also showing greater detachment”, etc. One telling example: a technician who was forbidden from mentioning the technical difficulties he might encounter unless he was able to offer a solution. This imposed silence causes psychological suffering, just as when we use indirect wording, or poorly understood terms borrowed from other languages, to soften a harsh reality.

Openly saying things and talking about them: a first step in the fight against such suffering?

Source: Santé mentale : que révèle l’épidémie de burn-out ? [Mental health: what does the burnout epidemic reveal?], interview of Thomas Périlleux by Marguerite Catton, France Culture, La Question du jour, October 10, 2024.