Bitter?

Before I start in, let me make clear that I have no problem with people who pray for things. I don't think that they're stupid or deluded, I just don't agree with them that it's effective. I don't particularly want people praying for me, and if they do, I don't want to hear about it, especially if they're praying for me to "see the light" or similar. Usually when I see people ask for prayer for themselves or others I keep my mouth shut and don't comment, it's not my place to try & dissuade them and the timing would usually be terrible! That all being said, it's been my observation that people who pray to get healed fail to get healed as often as they do get healed. When someone recovers, then "praise God!", but when they fail to recover it's either ignored or chalked up to something along the lines of God's "mysterious ways", or ultimate plan. But that's all hypothetical, let's move on to a specific example, as illustrated by the Facebook thread to the left.

Granted, I knew that I was starting trouble with my comment, but the person who was healing in this instance, unless he has changed greatly in the last year and a half, is not religious and was probably not praising God for the fact that his injury was healing. (The person making the initial comment is not the person who was injured). So I thought that I was on safe ground making a comment. Notice that, although one might easily infer that I was disagreeing with or contradicting the God praiser, my actual words merely added a group who merited some praise. (Not to mention the fact that our bodies naturally heal from minor injuries with or without prayer) I was then asked who "gave" the medical professionals their expertise. Even if one believes that there is power in prayer, surely my answer was logical, rational and fact-based...with no name-calling! But it's the response to that which really got my attention:

"Tom you seem bitter"

Bitter? I received no response to a request for an explanation of this characterization, other than that Jesus could heal "that". Now there might be areas where a case might be made for some bitterness in my life, likely harbor some toward my first wife for various reasons, and haven't quite put aside my attitude toward my former employer, but bitter...towards...what? Who? This seems to be a go-to response from some theists toward atheists, agnostics, skeptics and followers of other religions. There's an accusation that we're bitter towards God, or mad at God, or we hate God. I can't speak for a single person other than myself, but I arrived at my current worldview not because I was mad at any god or gods, but simply because it just didn't make sense to me any longer. If there is such a thing as "God", I don't see any evidence that he, she or it operates the way people think. 

So folks, pray all that you want, but not everyone else does, and it's not because we're bitter. 

Managers Part X - Minimizing Subordinate-Imposed Timne

As I alluded to at the end of Part IX, in theory there is no such thing as Subordinate-Imposed Time, but since practice often deviates from theory, in the real world, there is such a thing as Subordinate-Imposed time. Subordinate-Imposed Time is time spent doing things that a subordinate asked you to do. Back to theory - in theory in a typical organizational chart the people who give the orders are at the top and those who get ordered are lower down - there are invisible arrows always pointing down. But sometimes a crafty subordinate will figure a way to switch that arrow around so that it's pointing up. Usually this takes the form of a subordinate either not knowing how to do something (bad training perhaps?) or not wanting to take responsibility for the things listed in their job description. With the former, the manager has to get involved to either retrain the subordinate or to do the job herself; in the latter will also result in the manager having to do the work personally. In order to eliminate or minimize Subordinate-Imposed Time, the professional manager must internalize the reality that the job of a manager is not to do things, but to see that things get done. William Oncken, in his book Managing Management Time lays out five levels for a subordinate:

1. Wait until being told before doing anything
2. Ask what to do before doing anything
3. Make independent decisions regarding what to do, but check with a manager before actually doing it
4. Make independent decisions regarding what to do, informing the manager after the fact what was done
5. Make independent decisions regarding what to do, routine reporting in only

#1, it should be fairly obvious to see, should only apply to brand-new people who barely know what their job is, let alone how to do it; although I have seen this behavior in people who had been in a job long enough to know the basics. Even the newest employee will quickly move to #2 and ask "What do I do now?" after completing a task.

#2 is where most entry-level employees spend most of their day. The boss gives them a to-do list, the employees complete the list and then go ask what to do next. This is why I have never been a big supporter of to-do lists, it limits the employee to a certain set of tasks and doesn't encourage them to think

#3 is where you want your employees to be fairly quickly. rather than give them a list, give them a vision of how you want things to be when they are done. Back when I worked in a grocery store we had a position that was called "grocery clerk", these employees, usually high school students working their first job, were responsible for bringing in stray shopping carts, filling displays, straightening out the aisles, cleaning bathrooms and overall customer service. A "okay" clerk did the items on the list and then asked a manager what to do, or reverted to #1 and didn't do anything! A good grocery clerk knew that his job included all the aforementioned things and organized his time to get them all done, prioritizing as needed, usually checking with the manager if he was going outside or taking a break. 

#4 is the goal for your employees. To extend the grocery clerk example, a manager didn't need a great grocery clerk to check in except occasionally during a shift, and trusted the clerk to do what needed to be done without being repeatedly told. This is also where you want all supervising or managing employees to be. 

#5 is where very few people have they confidence to be, and what very few managers have the trust to allow. This is where true delegation takes place. Delegation is where an employee knows what needs to be done and does it, secure in the knowledge that they have the responsibility and the authority to get it done. Delegation from the manager's perspective is where the manager has done sufficient training and instruction for the subordinate and has enough confidence and trust in the subordinates ability to allow that independence. It is the opposite of assigning, which is what takes place in #1 and #2, and a little bit in #3.

The independence scale can be looked at somewhat like an insurance policy. With #1 you have a pretty high premium (the time you have to spend in Subordinate-Imposed Time) but a low deductible (amount of exposure to risk - you're involved 100%, so there's no chance a subordinate's actions can get you in trouble). With #5 you have a low premium (very little time spent supervising the subordinate) but a very high deductible, or exposure to risk (it's still your ass on the line if the subordinate messes up). If you have an aversion to risk (i.e. trusting your subordinates) then you'll be stuck forever with subordinates who can't decide what hand to wipe their butts with without consulting you first; but if you can train and coach your people to rise to the higher numbers on the independence scale, then you will have all but eliminated a significant demand on your time. 

There's another side to this. Unless you are at the top of the corporate pyramid, you have a boss. Maybe you have a boss who believes in the levels of independence and strives to eliminate her Subordinate-Imposed Time, freeing you to operate at Level Five, but more likely you have a manager who likes to micromanage to some extent. Then it becomes your job to manage your boss in order to get yourself higher on the independence scale.