You are not a psychologist, you are a manager.
Personality factors in individuals are something that every company seems to want to assess and change. There is a false belief that is only reinforced by management “I have these certain personality traits therefore for people to be successful like me, they must also have these traits.”
For organizational change to work and the assessment that the company just did to be worth the paper it is printed on the Abstract Concepts of the Assessment must be put into practical application of the work. Otherwise you are just exacerbating the problems by causing more problems.
We all have, a one time in our careers, had a manger who has less capable or as capable as us. While having a manager who has the same capability may sound nice, it creates tension.
Don’t ever criticize a manager for not being a leader if no one has ever told him or her what the role is. Rather criticize the inept organization that appointed them.
If we are to hold a manager accountable for managing staff, they must have accountability and the necessary authority to exercise their judgment over their team. Otherwise you are handicapping their work and forcing them to feel unaccountable because they have no authority to do their work.
Systems-Drive-Behaviors putting a manager into a system that forces them to be accountable, when you do not give them any authority over their work only leads to frustration, burnout, negative behaviors and poor quality work.
The minute you think that no-one has any great ideas or believe that you have to be the hero is when you are blind to your own negative reinforcement of people.
If the goals are too small people feel micromanaged. If the goals are too large people are lost and unsure what to do, macromanaged.
Properly delegated Contextual Goals are Goldilocks Goals…They cannot be too big or too small. They are just right, and matched to the person.
The most frightening thing about having a manager that is “Too small” and creates under-performance and dis-engagement is the gradual reduction in level of competence of the subordinate team, which creates broad departmental under-performance and increased dis-engagement. The department begins to sink in scale, matching the competence of its manager.
Organizations and teams exist to get work done. This often proves to be challenging. It requires a structure with competent people at each level of the organization and procedures which allow them to do their best, unencumbered by red-tape and nincompoop managers who shouldn’t be there in the first place.
It is not just a matter the manager’s saying ‘Do this it’s what you’re paid for!’; it is requisitely a matter of saying, ‘I want this task done and I am assigning it to you; I am accountable for assessing the outcome.