293 The Art of Management: Practical Insights for New and Experienced Managers with Jim McCormick | Partnering Leadership Global Thought Leader

***DISCLAIMER: Please note that the following AI-generated transcript may not be 100% accurate and could contain misspellings or errors.***

[00:00:00] Mahan Tavakoli: Welcome to Partnering Leadership. I'm really excited this week to be welcoming Jim McCormick. Jim is the founder and president of Research Institute for Risk Intelligence and he is also the author of the First Time Manager, a book I highly recommend to all of my clients because it's important to know how to manage people.

So I really enjoyed the conversation with Jim. I'm sure you will too, and learn a lot from him as I have.

I also enjoy hearing from you. Keep your comments coming. Mahan mahan.com. There's a microphone icon on partneringleadership.com. You can leave voice messages for me there. Don't forget to follow the podcast on your podcasting app and when you get a chance, leave a rating in review. That will help more people find and benefit from the conversations. Now here is my conversation with Jim McCormick. 

Jim McCormick, welcome to Partnering Leadership. I'm thrilled to have you in this conversation with me.

[00:01:02] Jim McCormick: It's an honor to be here and I very much appreciate your interest in the issues for which I have a great passion.

[00:01:08] Mahan Tavakoli: I loved the first time manager and the power of risk. in this conversation. I wanna spend a lot of time on the first time manager because I see all kinds of conversations around leadership. But it's also really important for us to learn how to manage more effectively before we balance it with that leadership.

But before we get there, we'd love to know whereabouts you grew up and how your upbringing impacted the kind of person you've become.

[00:01:35] Jim McCormick: That's a very interesting question. I grew up in southern California. It was a rather bucolic environment back in those times. It was very innocent and lots of recreational opportunities and the world was our oyster. It's a very different setting in today's world. And there was a mindset that you could do anything you set your mind to.

And it was very real because what you saw was a tremendous entrepreneurial ethos that was present back then. And I think it's still present today, but there's, I think, some more limits nowadays than there were back then. And It was hit your wagon to a star kind of mindset. And that's something I've always bought into to a great extent.

So that led to doing something crazy, which was at a very young age saying, I really like to work in Washington, DC in politics. And I was able to get a position in a presidential administration, which is no small task. Did that for four years and that was intriguing.

Something that has changed my life. And then probably, one of the most significant things that happened after pursuing an engineering degree MBA and a lot of different business experience was going and doing something really crazy, which was becoming a part of an expedition of skydiving to the North Pole which was a life-changing experience. 

And that launched me off in an entirely new direction. And I have never worked for an organization ever since then on a full-time basis. And that's my choice. So it's fun to have had the privilege of crafting my career in the manner in which I've chosen.

[00:03:04] Mahan Tavakoli: Really exciting that you've had a chance to craft it. I would love to find out about that North Pole expedition. But before that, how did you end up getting into skydiving? Jim.

[00:03:15] Jim McCormick: My comment to parents is be careful what books you have your kids read because they dramatically influence who they become at a very young age. I read a book as it was on my summer reading list. I don't know if that's still something that goes on, but we had one and it was about commando training, and the chapter about parachuting was intriguing to me, to the point where I read it twice and I know that's where the seed was planted. From that point on, I wanted to at least try one time jumping out of a plane and it was all. 

I saw it as nothing more than a personal improvement device. My premise was if I could summon up the courage to jump out of a plane, it would somehow make me a better person. Cause I'm a big believer that if we face our fears and proceed despite them, that we were the better for it. I had no anticipation that I would do it more than a single time. And I was obviously wrong. I've now been skydiving having more than half my life. I have over 5,300 skydives and I've heard 15 world records. And it's something that has been a center point of my life in a very constructive and positive way.

[00:04:11] Mahan Tavakoli: That's incredible the number of dives you've had. Now I've had a couple of Navy Seals on the. Cast Rich Dian Alden Mills, and both of them say that they were terrified every time they jumped out of the plane. So even though they're Navy Seals, they want to talk about the fact that it's not that they ever got over the fear.

Have you gotten over the fear?

[00:04:37] Jim McCormick: No. People say when did you stop being afraid? I said I'll let you know if it ever happens. But my observation is I don't think that'd be a really good idea. You're doing something that is potentially gonna end your life every time you leave a plane. And so you need to have great regard for what it is that you're doing.

Now the character of the fear has changed. It tends to be more of a performance anxiety as opposed to a fear of whether I'm gonna live through the experience. But nevertheless, some degree of fear is, I think, appropriate and constructive and necessary in that setting. You've gotta respect what you fear.

[00:05:05] Mahan Tavakoli: And I Imagine that's also important in the work that you do Jim. You started the research institute for risk intelligence. I imagine that mindset is important to understanding risk, assessing risk, and then proceeding in organizational decision making.

[00:05:25] Jim McCormick: Yes, it is. But it's also important to understand. I don't ever wanna create the misimpression that a high risk inclination is uniformly positive. and I try hard to not send that message. I also want to make sure people understand that a low inclination is not negative. You have to have both.

Within an organization, you have instigators and you have mitigators. You have to have both. If you have nothing but instigators, you're gonna have chaos. If you have nothing but mitigators, you're gonna have a lack of forward progress. So both need to be present and there's a natural tension that will occur between them that it needs to be respectful and constructive tension.

And that's a big part of what I work with my clients on, is first identifying levels of risk inclination numerically. Cause that tends to make people more comfortable. And then talking risk styles and how they can be complimentary so they don't work against one another. But let me just pose a question to you. Do you think entrepreneurs are risk takers?

[00:06:18] Mahan Tavakoli: My initial reaction would be yes, but with you asking the question, I would assume it depends is the right answer.

[00:06:26] Jim McCormick: The answer is, entrepreneurs are risk takers of necessity, not of choice. They're not inspired by some sort of perverse pleasure out of taking a risk. They're inspired by the desire to be more successful, and they understand that they need to take risks in order to get there, but they understand that they only take the risk because that's a means to an end, not because it's an end in.

[00:06:52] Mahan Tavakoli: And then building on that , in organizations and in teams, you said you need a mix of people. 

How do you maintain healthy tension? So everyone's working toward the same common goal rather than people separating from each other and fighting with each other based on their risk, ocean.

[00:07:14] Jim McCormick: The answer is you need to have risk awareness. And by that if you and I go through a process of determining our risk quotient, which is a concept we developed at the institute. and let's just throw some numbers out there. On a scale of one to 10, let's say you're a seven and I'm a four we know intuitively that in that scenario, with a higher number being more risk inclined, that you're more risk inclined than I do. 

When we put a number on it, it's a little less threatening. We can discuss it. We have an awareness of it. That's the first step. The second step is if in that scenario, if you're the more creative type, if you're more of an idea generator and I'm more of an implementer, then what we need to do is have mutual respect. Meaning it is a privilege to be an idea generator. It is a privilege to be an instigator, and you cannot do it unless you have the people who are gonna be able to assist you with the implementation because oftentimes the idea generators are not great implementers. 

And my point is there needs to be a dynamic of appreciation. So you come to me and say, Jim, I got five new ideas today, and of course I'm gonna roll my eyes and think, of course you do. And I'm sure I'm gonna be responsible for implementing all of them, but then the quick follow on is, and I know I can't do this without you and then now we're in a good place and I understand where you're coming from. And the other part is you need to say, Jim, I'm gonna give you permission to push back whenever you think that this is a bad idea, or you think we're going about this poorly because I really need you to do that because we'd see the world differently. Where I'd go with that is we've all seen situations where two people get the exact same information and come to different conclusions.

Okay. Our contention is, and our assessment is a significant part of why that happens are what we call the risk filters through which we process information. They lead us off in different directions. There needs to be that awareness so that doesn't become a negative tension.

[00:09:08] Mahan Tavakoli:  It's interesting because as you were mentioning, I was thinking about the fact that at least in general and in a lot of organizations, we celebrate the idea generators and don't recognize the value that the other group brings to the dynamic. 

We're always talking about the risk takers, the idea generators not realizing that needs to be balanced, otherwise there's gonna be total chaos.

[00:09:34] Jim McCormick: There's a gentleman by the name of Howard Schultz, who almost nobody has ever heard of. He passed away a few years ago, who's the CEO of Starbucks, and yet it is extremely rare that people have ever heard his name. His attribution upon his passing was that he was a balance point. 

Actually, his nickname was tortoise and his job was to dial it back and be the reference point so that things didn't get too crazy. and the acknowledgement that's present in his obituary, which was published in the Wall Street Journal, is that the organization could not have been successful without him serving as that balance point. You're right, we tend to celebrate the Elon Musks and Steve Jobs and people like that, which is great. And that's really important. But as I said, it's a privilege to be that person and you can't do it without the implementation.

[00:10:25] Mahan Tavakoli: So as you can tell Jim, I can spend the entire hour talking to you on risk, and you have a great book, the Power of Risk, which I highly recommend. Recommend for people to get started on that. But the reason I really wanted to have this conversation is because you have one of the best management. Out there and I see so many individuals and organizations challenged with management. Even just before we started the conversation, I saw an article, Jim Deed Earth had.

Written in MIT Sloan, where he talks about saving organizations from obsession with leadership. And there is this obsession. So that's why I wanna talk to you more about your book, the first Time manager. You talk about the difference between management and leadership.

They're both vital. What is the difference between management and leadership in your estimate?

[00:11:23] Jim McCormick: In my estimation, leadership is about inspiring and management is about directing. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be oppressive. I would put it another way. To me, management is the cake, and leadership is the icing. You need to have the basics or you don't have anything to put the icing on. You want to progress to where. You're functioning as a leader, but unless you have the basics put together, you're not gonna get there because you're just gonna be functioning a superficial level it's great to go around in aspiring people, but if you don't know how to delegate, you don't know how to hire people, you don't know how to do evaluations, you don't know how to correct in inappropriate behaviors, then you can't be a leader.

[00:12:01] Mahan Tavakoli:  Those are the challenges organizations and individuals have. So I want to delve a little bit deeper into some of them. In the book you talk about taking on the role of a manager and some of the pitfalls to avoid. So when someone becomes a manager, what are the initial pitfalls?

What are the challenges and how can they overcome them?

[00:12:23] Jim McCormick: The book is very much towards people that are in a first time management role. But with that said, I think there's a lot of insights that are available to people that have a lot of management experience. Actually, it's interesting because I was contacted recently by someone who'd said have you considered a different version of the book?

Because. I provide this to all of my executive clients, and some of these people are very experienced managers, senior executives, and they say why would I read? This is about a first time manager who said, because there's a lot in here that's valuable to somebody who actually has been managing for a long time.

So the basics of management. But the reason the book, I think, has been so successful over the years, is that these organizations will never stop advancing people who are excellent individual contributors and moving into management, just assuming they'll figure it out. And oftentimes that has a negative and sometimes catastrophic outcome because people management is a whole different world.

Individual contributors doesn't mean that you can be a good manager. So that's a whole different approach. And an additional factor is oftentimes, the people for whom this book was initially written are people who are sending from an organization, so now they find themselves managing some of the people that there previously were their peers, which is a very precarious circumstance because oftentimes it will change the social dynamic and the friendships that have developed in a way that's very challenging to the point. A recently ascended manager, a new manager has to basically make a decision as to whether they're gonna be a manager and a leader, or whether they're gonna be the person's friend. 

Because unfortunately, whether you like it or not, they always say, oh, nothing will change. We're still buddies. We'll still go out for beers in the evening. But the reality is that does change. And that's one of the pitfalls that they'll commonly come up against. The other common pitfall is they'll over-manage. They're thinking, okay, I've worked really hard to get to this point. 

I know how to do this. I'm gonna tell everybody how to do their job. And that of course has a very oppressive impact. And they need to step back. They need to do less talking, more listening, and empower their people to do what they're really good at doing. And the third element I'd give you. the level of direction that any individual needs is different. 

What person A, B, and C need A may need a lot of direction. C may need virtually none and will cha if too much is given to them, and then the B person might be somewhere in between. So a big pitfall is handling everybody uniform with, so it would be Overmanaging talking more than listening and not respecting the fact that people are all.

[00:14:53] Mahan Tavakoli: Those are relevant for managers with all levels of experience. Jim 

Now, one of the challenges that I see, Jim, is you also alluded to it. Balance of whether someone is new to management or has experience in management, the balance and desire to control rather than effectively delegate to want to be the perfectionist that does the job. How do you guide leaders and managers to more effectively delegate and be able to remove themselves from doing so?

[00:15:32] Jim McCormick: Delegation obviously involves absolute goal clarity. There needs to be a clear understanding as to what needs to be accomplished. So that's item number one. Then there's the challenge of over controlling and perfectionism. 

The point is that a manager needs to be very thoughtful about the level of effort they need to put to end any given task, and that means their potential involvement in the process. The point is they need to be able to provide what Kevin P Plank, the founder of Armor, all called guardrails, which means they need to establish the objective that needs to be accomplished, and then they need to provide the guardrails.

The guardrails are simple. They're budgetary authority decision making, a. And the reporting requirements during the process. So it might be something where it's of such import or it's so fluid that they need to be checking in more commonly like weekly or twice weekly. It also may be a more long-term project where checking in on a monthly basis or something different than that would be appropriate. 

But the important part is, okay, you've got a current state, you've got the, you have budgetary authority, you have decision making authority, and then comes the hardest part. Leave them alone. Let them pursue it in a manner of their choosing, and acknowledge that two things, they will inevitably do it differently than you would. That's when you need to set your perfectionism aside. They will at times, seemingly actually go backwards. 

That's part of the process. Now, obviously if it becomes destructive, you need to intervene, but you'll need to allow their latitude. Why is that important? Because you're going to get a higher degree of engagement and you'll get more of their potential. Nobody can honestly say they're getting a hundred percent of the potential of the people they lead. But you can get more than you're currently.

[00:17:25] Mahan Tavakoli: So Jim, as the manager goes through this delegation process and you mentioned there might be some projects that would require a couple of times a week check-in, there are some projects that would require less frequent check-in. 

Is there a regular cadence that you recommend to managers to use as they work with their team members, whether it is delegating or coaching them for that level of accountability toward the objectives, staying within the guard rails, achieving the goals?

[00:18:02] Jim McCormick: This is where management is fun because there's no distinct answer. We may be working on something that is extremely high profile, very dynamic, and we need to be meeting on it twice a week. We need to be meeting Monday morning and Thursday afternoon. But then it, once it gets to steady state might say, okay, this is now overkill.

We can now get together every two weeks. Then where clearly on a solid path we can get together on a monthly basis. So the answer is no, there is not, and that's where the subjectivity and the awareness needs to kick in for a manager. 

[00:18:36] Mahan Tavakoli: So it is case by case basis. Is it also then individual by individual basis as you are working in trying to establish the right team dynamics?

[00:18:49] Jim McCormick: Absolutely, and the point is the guardrails, meaning the latitude that you're giving 'em as far as decision making authority and budgetary authority are not static. If they're doing a great job or there's a high level of expertise that's been illustrated in the past. 

They can be much broader. If it's a group that's struggling or has less experience, they need to appropriately be narrower. Again, that's where the subjectivity comes in and the awareness that the manager needs to bring to the process. 

There's something called group social. It's a concept that comes from the sociologist, and it's very important when you're putting together a team and what it basically states is that any trait that is uniformly present in a group of people will be magnified. But there's an important thing I just mentioned, uniformly present. There are times when as a manager you might say, this team needs to be really risk forward.

They need to be very progressive in what they're doing. It's important that a manager understands, they only want to put people who have that same orientation in that team. Similarly, there might be a situation where there needs to be a high degree of caution. 

It's a risk management environment. And you want everybody to be more on the cautious side. What I'm telling you is group socialization says there will be a magnification effect, which can be positive, can be negative. You need to be aware of it. If you wanna negate it, then you put a mix of those characteristics in the group and that magnification will go away.

[00:20:14] Mahan Tavakoli: That's an interesting perspective. So a lot of times we talk about group dynamics and team dynamics and the value that cognitive diversity and other things bring to the team. 

What you're saying is that helps when you want greater friction. and greater deliberation in the process, not the projects that have to be more risk forward right?

[00:20:38] Jim McCormick: So example, let's say. All of a sudden you find you're at a disadvantage and you need a very aggressive product development team, you wanna make sure that everybody that's on that team, if they need to develop something quickly and they need to get some new ideas on the table. 

You don't wanna put the cautious people in that group. That doesn't mean that every idea they come up with is gonna be good, but it means they're gonna come up with a lot more ideas. They're gonna come up with a dozen ideas instead of three ideas, and you can then filter them from there and figure out which ones you wanna go forward. 

[00:21:07] Mahan Tavakoli: Jim, the other challenge that I see with teams and team dynamics that managers need to be able to work through is managing conflict in the team. How can that be best?

[00:21:24] Jim McCormick: That's an interesting question. My first comment is that there needs to be a culture of respect, presence. The culture of respect is established from the top. It needs to be something that is illustrated by your management style and the manner in which you regard people. Inevitably, we're gonna have differences of opinion with people. 

There's some subjects that do not belong in the workplace. Politics is and religion is an example. There's certain topics that are not appropriate because all they do is potentially lead to conflict. So let's assume that you have the ability to explain to people that's a discussion that's not appropriate in this setting. Now let's move on to where the conflicts exist on a business side. 

The reality is, and awareness of different orientations is appropriate, meaning go, keep going back to risk. Cause it's where the area that we study high risk inclination, low risk inclination, result intentions. There needs to be an acknowledgement that the styles need to be complimentary. Then that goes to when we have differences of opinion. 

There needs to be mutual respect where you ultimately need to go to say you need to agree to. and that's really important. And then let's work together. We know that this is gonna come up on a recurring basis. And my guess is you're gonna come out here, I'm gonna come out there, but I'm not going to prejudge where you're gonna come out cause you just might surprise me and I might surprise you. But we've gotta work together because we have something in common.

[00:22:50] Mahan Tavakoli: Having that common goal helps. So team dynamics and managing conflict, one of the things that I see happen in a lot of teams and organizations, Jim, is where there are dysfunctional individuals or employees. and the manager has a very difficult time addressing that. So they are hoping the problem will take care of itself.

Everyone in the team knows. So what are approaches for managers in addressing performance issues and managing problem employees?

[00:23:27] Jim McCormick: This does not need to be complex, and unfortunately, sometimes it's made more complex than it needs to be. My first comment is you can't overlook poor performance or challenges of the sort you need to confront them head on. In chapter 15 of the book, I talked specifically about the concept of a trifold analysis. And as you remember, that's a simple process it's called a trifold cuz if you just take a blank piece of paper and folded thirds the top, You sit down with somebody, where there's a challenge, there's a problem. And the first thing you do, and this is a blank piece of paper by the way, you jointly say, let's talk about your strengths, highlight strengths. You're good with people, you have great analytical skills, you're timely and reliable, whatever those things are. And then the second category is not your weakness. but your opportunities for improvement. Where could things go better? And then now we're talking about your ability to collaborate with a team is sometimes limited. Whatever it is that really are the challenges. The important part, if you started the conversation by engaging them, by genuinely focusing on their strengths, then the areas for improvement. Okay? The third category is the goals the third. Let's work together to establish the goals.

So within three weeks, you're going to X, whatever that is. There's something that's outstanding, that needs to be achieved, accomplished, whatever it is. We need to have a more constructive group dynamic. Your contributions in a meeting environment need to be uniformly constructive and not negative in your orientation, whatever the issues you're dealing with, and you jointly develop them and then you say, Great.

What's our time period? When are we gonna check in and see where we're at on these items and see what we want to refresh? And you might say, if it's a very intense situation that's not going well, it's gonna be quite soon, or it might be, let's talk again in 30 days. Let's talk again in 60 days. and then really importantly, you both sign that piece of paper. You give them a copy and they take it with them. Then they have a clear path. Why is that so important? This is really important tool because this is a performance improvement device. It doesn't need to be complex. I've had managers tell me they do that instead of doing an annual evaluation because they get so complex that sometimes they're not particularly useful. But it's really important also if you have an underperforming employee. Cause a, you want to bring them along ideally and improve their performance. R b, you need to document the fact that you've gone to great lengths to be able to do that, and they no longer belong in the organization.

[00:25:47] Mahan Tavakoli:  I love the approach. Jim. Besides the documentation that needs to happen in some cases is that in many instances I've seen managers including even. Uh, C e o that I'm working with put off those conversations because they can be hard. That level of accountability, coaching and then helping the person understand the corrective action that you expect them to take.

, it's a clearly laid out process that then can be implemented to support the person's development. And at certain times you might need to move them onto other opportunities. But I find in many instances, the managers, and as I mentioned, even sometimes CEOs, avoid the clearly laid out conversations that you just talked.

[00:26:40] Jim McCormick: And two comments. If you start the conversation by saying, here's what you're good at that is a less threatening environment, and you're less likely to procrastinate and put off a conversation that needs to occur. So that's a really important part. And my next comment is, and I state this in the book, when you have somebody that clearly no longer belongs as a part of the organization, your goal ideally, is to get to the point where they acknowledge that before you do 

[00:27:05] Mahan Tavakoli: I love that, Jim, your goal is to help them acknowledge. That issue before you do, because a lot of times the challenge that I see is that the person is shocked, absolutely shocked when they get a note that the organization is firing them or they're being let go because there wasn't that clarity ahead of.

[00:27:29] Jim McCormick: That is a. Failure if they're shocked.

[00:27:33] Mahan Tavakoli: Now, the other thing you mentioned, in chapter 18, you talk about no secrets, that transparency is really tough for a lot of managers, whether new managers or otherwise. So in dealing with a team and managing a team, what does no secrets mean? How transparent is transparent.

[00:27:55] Jim McCormick: The answer is the level of transparency that's appropriate is going to vary with the people that you're working with and the information you're speaking about. Some stuff legitimately needs to be confidential. One of the examples I've seen that I think works well is. A senior executive team. Might have information they need to share with the entire organization what they don't want to do is put some of their financial results, as an example, into an email and send it around. That could be forwarded outside of the organization. That's a problem. So what they might do instead is have an all hands meeting. Where they'll discuss the financial results, but they'll do it verbally in such a way that it doesn't create the same exposure. Ideally, if nobody's recording the conversation so that they're sharing the information or they might share the information in percentages. As opposed to actual numbers. Now your goal is to be able to disclose as much information as is constructive, to be able to help people do their job correctly. What you wanna avoid is a situation where information is power and you're intentionally keeping information away from people. Cuz quite frankly, you're trying to put them at a disadvantage.

That does not serve you well. You need to give them all the information they need to be successful. Now, that doesn't mean you tell 'em everything. You don't wanna have verbal diarrhea. You wanna just give them what they need to be successful. but again, leadership and management is an art. And that's why there's no specific roadmap. You need to be able to subjectively assess how much information they need and how much they can work with and be mindful of fact, there's information you could share with them that would not be constructive and would not help them. You could give them performance information beyond their department that would simply be distracting, and then all of a sudden they're worried about another department and that's not their.

[00:29:41] Mahan Tavakoli: So one of the challenges that I see in organizations with that transparency is the assumption that. The people understand more than they do, see more than they do, so the managers don't spend enough effort and time in clearly communicating. So on the communication ends of it, where do you see the biggest opportunities for improvement for managers?

What kinds of information do they need to consistently communicate with individuals and their.

[00:30:16] Jim McCormick: There's not a uniform answer. It depends on each individual, and I'm gonna go to one of the most important things I think that's. In the book, which is the span of control concept, and one of the biggest mistakes that experience and inexperienced managers make is they try to manage too many people and then everybody is at a disadvantage. My suggested. Generally speaking, you don't want to have more than five direct reports. The reason you don't wanna have more than five is there's five business days in the week and you want to have FaceTime with each of your people once a week. That's when the communication desire, and that's where the information sharing can take place. And it is always preferable to do it like you and I are doing it, or ideally if we're in the same room as opposed to doing it in any other format. And you might say, Jim, I'm struggling here because you're not giving me the information I need to be able to be successful in this project and I'm gonna. Okay, let's talk about that. I wanna make sure you have all the information you need. Or I might say, I'm not gonna answer that question because you don't need that and that's just gonna take you off in the wrong direction. You're gonna say whatever, I don't agree with you, but you're the boss and so I'm gonna go with that for now. So again, it's all very dynamic and subject. 

[00:31:28] Mahan Tavakoli: So 

with 

Respect to that, Jim, both. I see it in organizations and I've gotten emails from listeners saying . I don't have the time to meet with all of my direct reports because I have so many direct reports, and what I hear from you and I totally agree with is then you have too many direct reports, whether it's five or six.

You have to be able to, for whether it's the communication, delegation, accountability, you need to be able to work in that one-on-one conversation on an weekly basis.

[00:31:58] Jim McCormick: Part of the challenge is everybody wants to report. Because it makes them more important. They have direct contact. They would rather not have to go through somebody else to get to you. And similarly, you probably don't wanna have to go through other people to get to the next level up and the next level up. But that's a management decision. You need to ultimately say, okay, there's gonna only be five boxes on my organization chart. If that's the appropriate number in your circumstance. Sometimes it's fewer, sometimes it could be slightly more. And other people are gonna have to report through them, and then you have to hold them to, that.

And then when you have people that are leapfrogging, they're constantly bypassing their boss and sending you information, you need to be able to go back and say, valid question, I need you to deal with your supervisor, and then we'll take it.

[00:32:40] Mahan Tavakoli: What you've mentioned Jim, whether it's with respect to the clarity of what the objectives are, the boundaries that are set, the regular meetings, all those help with motivation. How else can managers play a role in their people's? Motivation One of my favorite concept. Because I believe it's so powerful it is in chapter 21, and that's dovetailing, and it's a huge means by which to engage your people and motivate your people. Dovetailing very simply is making sure you have absolute understanding of what a person's personal and professional goals are, and then your job as a manager and a leader is to defined where you can see the organization's goals can converge with those. One of the examples I referenced in the. Was the person that was working for me, they wanted to work on their language skills, foreign languages. And it turns out, in a situation we were working on developing a market that was a Spanish speaking market, and that's one of the languages they were working on, and we were able to engage them in that.

[00:33:43] Jim McCormick: So the magic of that was. It allowed them to move forward with their personal goals and also to advantage the organizational goals. That kind of dovetailing and dovetailing, like I'm showing my fingers going together is simply a woodworking joint. It's considered one of the strongest joints that's present.

So you've got the personal goals, you've got the organizational goals, they intertwine and you'll never see an employee and a contributor or team member that is more engaged and more enthusiastic than when you can do that.

[00:34:12] Mahan Tavakoli: Comes about as a result of the questioning that can happen in those one-on-one meetings with sincere interest, asking those questions to be able to dovetail for that motivation.

[00:34:22] Jim McCormick: the kind of stuff of saying, hey that's more like the casual, Hey, what'd you do this weekend? And kind of stuff. And they're saying I've really taken up an interest in X, Y, or Z And that's something that you put into your knowledge base and think about, is there a way for me to be able to incorporate that?

[00:34:38] Mahan Tavakoli: Uh, you Also work with CEOs and executives and managers at all levels. There are a couple of issues that I'm seeing more than ever. One is a challenge with them managing their time, and the other one is the level of anxiety and burnout that they are feeling both themselves and with respect to their teams.

Would love to get some of your thoughts and ideas. Managers have more things coming at them, how they can manage their time and balance their lives, and be able to guide their team in a way that doesn't lead to burnout and overwhelm.

[00:35:17] Jim McCormick: The. Managers are very thoughtful about the extent to which they're being proactive versus reactive. If you're proactive, you're establishing that you have some structure in your day, you have some structure in your schedule. You have times when the people that you lead know that you're not available unless the house is on fire. Because otherwise it's very easy for you to allow events to control. And that is a great prescription for not being successful. Where I go with that is I've worked with managers that actually have public offices and private offices. They actually have an office either off to the side or down the hall where they go and people don't know they're there and they're not accessible and they make it clear. Unless it's the boss, don't bother me. Because what they say is for two hours a day, whatever time that might be from 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM that is their time to function without interruptions. It is particularly challenging in the world where we have cell phones, we have text messages, we have instant messenger, we have emails for all that stuff to overwhelm us, and we've all had this experie. Eight or nine hours after we get to the office or we sit down, we realize we have done absolutely nothing that was on our to-do list, cuz all we've done all day is we've respond to other people's requirements. And that is not a good strategy. That doesn't mean , you put them off indefinitely, but you need to have discipline and your people need to understand, you will not hear back from me prior to noon or whatever you decide you're gonna do. Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays or whatever it is that you can establish because you need that time to be able to be proactive.

[00:36:50] Mahan Tavakoli:  Being overly responsive is not something to take pride in. It shows that you're totally distracted all the time.

[00:36:57] Jim McCormick: You can give priority to different emails and to different individuals. You can deactivate during certain periods of time and you know how it shows it. You send a text to somebody who's offline, it will tell you they're not currently receiving. There you go.

Then the expectations have been managed.

[00:37:13] Mahan Tavakoli: So part of this management Jim, that you also address is the fact that managers feel like they have to manage their teams, but they also have to be able to manage up whoever they're reporting to. What are some of your thoughts with respect to ways to manage up or effectively.

[00:37:32] Jim McCormick: This is something I'm, I'm, I'm, I really find enjoyable. It, needs to be done artfully and there's lots of opportunities there. And oftentimes they're not taken. And the bottom line is this, you need to do an analysis of the people that you respond to. They all function differently. There are people that need tons of information to make a decision. There are people that will tell you, tell me what time it is. Don't tell me how to make a watch. I just want the top line. And then we can move on from there. And there's the people that are gonna make a quick decision. And you know that. And there's the people that are gonna stew over the decision for a period of. So the challenge is just like managing your team, you need to respect the fact that everybody's different. Similarly, when you're managing upward, you need to be honoring of the fact that they all process differently. Their decision making process is different. And if you're not certain ask them, what information would you like to receive? How would you like to manage this process? Let them tell you and then be responsive. Do not treat them uniformly. 

[00:38:33] Mahan Tavakoli:  That's one of the things I was reflecting on as you were talking about it. I don't think in all of my years of managing people, anyone ever asked me, how do you prefer it? They might have known, they might have guessed by my style, how I preferred it, but I don't think anyone ever asked me. So one, key point is take the time to ask different people process the information differently. So it's good for us to ask know and adjust accordingly 

[00:38:59] Jim McCormick: there's something I developed for some clients where we talk specifically about different. Management styles and how you wanna be responsive to 'em when you're managing.

[00:39:08] Mahan Tavakoli:  So the book has a lot of great information on how to manage, and I believe it's as relevant to experience managers, managing teams, and managing. Above, which is also important, a critical role, both championing the team more effectively and championing uh, yourself as well. yourself as well. So, in addition to your book Jim, are there any leadership practices or resources you typically find yourself recommending?

For example, I find myself recommending your book to manager. when they need to learn how to manage more effectively. Are there any leadership practices or resources you find yourself typically recommending?

[00:39:48] Jim McCormick: I'm a big believer that you need to have current information and however you acquire that whether it's through business websites, it's through periodicals like the Wall Street Journal. It's through management case studies, like Harvard Business Review, whatever it is that works for you.

But it's important that you remain current and fresh because it's very easy to lapse. Dated information and we are fortunate to be in a very dynamic world where that doesn't work anymore.

[00:40:18] Mahan Tavakoli: We are in a dynamic world. So for the audience to find out more about you, your work, which extends much beyond this book and more on the risk front, how can the audience connect and find out more about you? Jim?

[00:40:31] Jim McCormick: The best place to do that is just to go to the website, which is risks hyphen institute.com. Risks plural rsk s hyphen institute.com, it gives you a pretty good overview and a means by which to contact us.

[00:40:45] Mahan Tavakoli: Fantastic. Now before we wrap up, you mentioned the experience you had skydiving in the North Pole and how that changed your perspective. Would love to know how that changed your perspective and your life.

[00:40:59] Jim McCormick: I'm a big believer that there comes a point in life where we need to take what I consider to be a spiritual risk, and I'm not talking about religion. What I'm talking about is a willingness to entrust something we can't fully validate or prepare for in its entirety that.

To me is the power of skydiving. There comes a. When, if you're gonna leave the plane, when it's not on the ground, you have to accept that there is a very slight chance that this might not work out, and that has to be sufficiently important to exit that aircraft over the top of the North Pole knowing that it was a thousand miles back to our base camp. And there were a lot of variables that were uncertain yet that were sufficiently important. That leap of faith, which in this case is somewhat literal, but when we do those things in life and there's something that is so important to us that we have to say, I'm gonna do that even though I'm not entirely certain what the outcomes are gonna be.

And that's a common thread in a lot of ceo. A lot of CEOs are sufficiently intuitive. They're gonna say, I can't validate everything, but we're gonna do this anyway. Partly because they feel comfortable with it and partly because they know if they wait for all the data to be available, the opportunity will pass. So it applies both in that environment on a, in a personal level. But what it basically did is it launched me off in a new direction of being able to say, okay, I'm not gonna go back to a conventional existence cuz that doesn't work for me. and some way or another, I'm gonna leverage this experience into a different career path, and that's what it allowed.

[00:42:23] Mahan Tavakoli: I'm glad you didn't go back to that conventional existence, Jim, and really appreciate your books. The Power of Risk is outstanding, so is the first time manager. , which is, even though it says the first time manager, it's my go-to reference and what I give most to managers who need to work on their management skills because it's really important as we mentioned earlier, leadership is critical and is important, but so are a lot of the management skills that you cover in the book.

I really appreciate you taking the time to share some of your thoughts and perspectives on management with the partnering leadership community. Thank you so much, Jim. MCC.

[00:43:03] Jim McCormick: It's an honor and I really appreciate your interest in the subjects and the fact that you've actually read the books before we talk. That's impressive.

[00:43:10] Mahan Tavakoli: Thank you, Jim.