Read on Twitter
In my first term at Med School, my tutor predicted me a 2:2/3rd 
He got the best out of me in the end though, so itâs been interesting to read this morning how his management skills surprisingly align with Googleâs findings on how their best managers operate. [THREAD]
He got the best out of me in the end though, so itâs been interesting to read this morning how his management skills surprisingly align with Googleâs findings on how their best managers operate. [THREAD]
Google conducted a large experiment in 2008 called Project Oxygen, which aimed to prove that managers didnât matter. They looked at employee ratings of their best and worst managers and characterised them, as well as their teams, performance.
Teams with the best managers performed better, and manager quality was the single best predictor of whether employees would stay or leave.
But was this correlation or causation? Did some managers just luckily end up with the best and most committed teams ?
But was this correlation or causation? Did some managers just luckily end up with the best and most committed teams ?
At google, engineers are free to change project teams throughout the year. So next, the researchers looked at what happened to the employee survey results of about 70 employees who moved from the top 25% rated managers to the bottom 25%, and 70 who went the other way.
Those that moved to worse managers scored significantly lower on 34/42 measures of employee satisfaction, and those that went the opposite way improved significantly on 6/42 measures.
Good management works.
Good management works.
So next they looked at what qualities make a good manager, by conducting structured, double-blind interviews with the best and worst managers. Their key features are summarised in the table below (from âwork rulesâ by Lazlo Bock)
Converting these insights into action then became the tricky part.
They decided on creating an âupward feedback scoreâ survey, where employees were invited to rate their managers performance on each of these 8 domains, hoping this would encourage personal development.
They decided on creating an âupward feedback scoreâ survey, where employees were invited to rate their managers performance on each of these 8 domains, hoping this would encourage personal development.
The author starts by sharing his own, initially painful(!), story. He scored only 77% approval, just above the lower quartile score.
Nevertheless, he found the focussed feedback and;
1. Making it publicly available to his staff, to encourage discussion and transparency and
Nevertheless, he found the focussed feedback and;
1. Making it publicly available to his staff, to encourage discussion and transparency and
2. The evidence-based remedial courses Google put on, to develop specific deficits managers identify, such as coaching
...very helpful, and these enabled him to climb up to the top quartile in the coming years.
...very helpful, and these enabled him to climb up to the top quartile in the coming years.
So what effect did this have organisation wide?
Remarkably, average manager approval ratings rose from 83% to 88% over 2 years. The lower quartile improved from 70 to 77% approval ratings.
Imagine the impact that had on the organisation - 5% better leaders...
Remarkably, average manager approval ratings rose from 83% to 88% over 2 years. The lower quartile improved from 70 to 77% approval ratings.
Imagine the impact that had on the organisation - 5% better leaders...
At @JHubDefence, a fellow scout tried something similar to this out in the Army, with similarly spectacular results. I tried it with those I managed too - I canât rate it highly enough.
Google it and have a go yourself with your team. After all, âwhat you measure, you becomeâ.
Google it and have a go yourself with your team. After all, âwhat you measure, you becomeâ.
