NZ bosses’ worst traits outlined

New Zealand business leaders need to shake off bad habits and start trusting their staff more if they want to see the best possible results, one management expert says.

Ralph Bathurst, a senior lecturer at Massey University, has written a book, The Good, The Bad and The Downright Ugly Side of New Zealand Business.

He said the worst traits of managers were consistent around the world. Here are four of New Zealand bosses’ worst.

Micromanagement

Micromanagement was one of the most detrimental things a manager could do, he said, and could quickly turn a workplace toxic. ‘‘Managers tend not to trust their staff and believe they know better.’’ Many were working on the assumption that the staff were unwilling to comply with what needed to be done, he said. He said that meant many managers ended up doing the job for people rather than allowing them the freedom to use the skills they’d been hired for, to do the job. Too long in that environment and people would check out, he said, simply doing what they were asked to do and not offering any of their own perspective, skills or initiative to add value.

Sticking rigidly to decisions

Another big problem was when people were reluctant to step back from decisions, he said. That was sometimes evident in a highprofile way with politicians.

‘‘Managers make decisions and then because they’ve made that decision they need to stick to it and escalate their commitment to that decision rather than being ready to review it.’’ Managers needed to treat their decisions as provisional and open to discussion with staff, he said.

Not trusting staff

Bathurst said many workers were stuck in a weird situation of being treated like fully functioning, responsible adults ... everywhere except work. They would be trusted to pay back a hefty mortgage and to raise their children without having to check in with someone every day, he said. But then they went to work and were ‘‘treated like a child’’. Bosses must learn to trust their staff.’’

Failing up

Managers were often brought into a business for a set period of time, or to achieve a set goal, he said. They would bring in their own ideas and adopt a ‘‘clearing house’’ approach to changing things, which would often stifle innovation, he said. But then after a period of time, even if they had created a dysfunctional environment, if they could point to some successful outcomes they would often still be offered a new and better role.