4 ms·

The analogy I like using that of a carriage drawn by a large team of horses. Workers are the horses, and CxOs are the drivers. Management is the harness the kee

The analogy I like using that of a carriage drawn by a large team of horses. Workers are the horses, and CxOs are the drivers. Management is the harness the keeps all the horses pointed in the same direction and running together. A majority of the physical work is done by the horses, of course, and it looks like the drivers (Top level management) are slacking off - but everything is really on them. "Strategy" is really just where to go and which route to get there. And if they choose wrong or time things badly, everyone else in the organization has done their work correctly, and the failure is purely executive. The workers are great at running (execution), but left to themselves are horrible at self organizing and running in the direction required in tandem, with the correct beat and stride. It doesn't matter how strong or fast the individual horses are, it's much more important that they run together without friction or distraction and support each other. That's where (good) management comes in. They're the blinders that keep the horses from individually pulling in different directions and chasing distractions, and the harnesses that keep the entire team fixed together. The exert pressure on horses to both slow down and speed up, and both are vitally important. Done well, management is critical to making sure that the whole org works smoothly. They also act as a communication bridge between strategy and execution. Strategy is great for the all hands once a week or month, where the execs sing about the promised land, but the weekly plans, budgets, and responsibilities of making sure everyone is fed and has toilet access are all management. Bad managers typically suffer from delusions of being either horses or drivers. They either try to work hard like the horses (bad idea - there's no harness or blinders), or think they're in charge of strategy (they're seen as just slackers, and no harness or blinders again). They don't temper executive vision with their knowledge of reality, nor do they transitively inspire workers.

astazangasta 7y ago
>The workers are great at running (execution), but left to themselves are horrible at self organizing and running in the direction required in tandem This is an ideological claim that is counter to my experience. Workers are fine at self-organizing, they just might organize in ways that management does not agree with because workers and management may have different ideas about what the company needs. In my experience the usual reason that workers have trouble organizing themselves is that they are not given control over resources like hiring and equipment purchases, specifically so that they won't be able to organize without management.
- xivzgrev 7y ago
  Can you share more of your experience? Mine tends to be like the OP. For example, suppose a company has a new product and everyone believes there is a lot of opportunity with new product. So then each team figured out a strategy on how to approach said product independently -product managers build new features and iterate -marketers start launching campaigns to drive adoption and engagement -data science is building new models to find the best customers for -customer support is trying to figure out what the hell new product is and what all these complaints are referencing Etc Depending on the product / size there may be some self organizing collaboration but many times not, or certain teams are left out unconciously. At least one reason is that each team doesn’t yet trust other teams to help set their strategy - not maliciously but just from a lack of evidence. If you are trying to maximize impact the intuitive thing is to work out what you can contribute and ask for what you need from other teams vs developing a joint strategy / approach. Collaboration takes time with an unknown return. Now if you happen to know the other teams and already have worked a lot together you are more likely to reach out from the start. It’s the senior managers / directors that are calling out that teams should be talking with each other sooner than later, getting buy in, etc.
  - astazangasta 7y ago
    My experience is that senior managers don't have the time or inclination to be aware of operational issues. They are unable to perceive something like there is a structural issue between units A and B. These issues are actually seen and surfaced by workers in units A and B, who actually experience the result of the mismatch. If they are able to cross-communicate directly they may be able to resolve the issue without intervention from above. However, they may not be able to, typically if this involves hiring. But the only way that a senior manager could even understand there is an issue is if someone in unit A or unit B makes them aware of it. This is useless overhead. The workers have to be able to successfully communicate the issue up to senior management and usually also suggest the resolution, then get buy-in from senior management on implementation. If instead the workers were more empowered to make decisions themselves the information and decision-making bottleneck could be avoided.
- Spooky23 7y ago
goalieca 7y ago
Analogy breaks down because “horses” are just as smart as the “drivers” (sometimes more and sometimes less). Sometimes the horses work their way up to be drivers because of luck and drive. Sometimes the drivers were born into it because they went to posh boarding school.
- praneshp 7y ago
  > Analogy breaks down because “horses” are just as smart as the “drivers” (sometimes more and sometimes less) Sure, but horse is horse and driver is driver. I can give excuses all day for why I'm not the driver.`
- Spooky23 7y ago
  Not always. Like the prototypical draft horses, the people have blinders on. The scope of their observations are limited to what is in front of them, or what they hear in the stable after work. The horse may think moving forward on the road is the wrong direction, but the horse also cannot see the obstacle off to the side.
gtirloni 7y ago
> It doesn't matter how strong or fast the individual horses are, it's much more important that they run together without friction or distraction and support each other. This.

astazangasta 7y ago

>The workers are great at running (execution), but left to themselves are horrible at self organizing and running in the direction required in tandem This is an ideological claim that is counter to my experience. Workers are fine at self-organizing, they just might organize in ways that management does not agree with because workers and management may have different ideas about what the company needs. In my experience the usual reason that workers have trouble organizing themselves is that they are not given control over resources like hiring and equipment purchases, specifically so that they won't be able to organize without management.

xivzgrev 7y ago
Can you share more of your experience? Mine tends to be like the OP. For example, suppose a company has a new product and everyone believes there is a lot of opportunity with new product. So then each team figured out a strategy on how to approach said product independently -product managers build new features and iterate -marketers start launching campaigns to drive adoption and engagement -data science is building new models to find the best customers for -customer support is trying to figure out what the hell new product is and what all these complaints are referencing Etc Depending on the product / size there may be some self organizing collaboration but many times not, or certain teams are left out unconciously. At least one reason is that each team doesn’t yet trust other teams to help set their strategy - not maliciously but just from a lack of evidence. If you are trying to maximize impact the intuitive thing is to work out what you can contribute and ask for what you need from other teams vs developing a joint strategy / approach. Collaboration takes time with an unknown return. Now if you happen to know the other teams and already have worked a lot together you are more likely to reach out from the start. It’s the senior managers / directors that are calling out that teams should be talking with each other sooner than later, getting buy in, etc.
- astazangasta 7y ago
  My experience is that senior managers don't have the time or inclination to be aware of operational issues. They are unable to perceive something like there is a structural issue between units A and B. These issues are actually seen and surfaced by workers in units A and B, who actually experience the result of the mismatch. If they are able to cross-communicate directly they may be able to resolve the issue without intervention from above. However, they may not be able to, typically if this involves hiring. But the only way that a senior manager could even understand there is an issue is if someone in unit A or unit B makes them aware of it. This is useless overhead. The workers have to be able to successfully communicate the issue up to senior management and usually also suggest the resolution, then get buy-in from senior management on implementation. If instead the workers were more empowered to make decisions themselves the information and decision-making bottleneck could be avoided.
Spooky23 7y ago

goalieca 7y ago

Analogy breaks down because “horses” are just as smart as the “drivers” (sometimes more and sometimes less). Sometimes the horses work their way up to be drivers because of luck and drive. Sometimes the drivers were born into it because they went to posh boarding school.

praneshp 7y ago
> Analogy breaks down because “horses” are just as smart as the “drivers” (sometimes more and sometimes less) Sure, but horse is horse and driver is driver. I can give excuses all day for why I'm not the driver.`
Spooky23 7y ago
Not always. Like the prototypical draft horses, the people have blinders on. The scope of their observations are limited to what is in front of them, or what they hear in the stable after work. The horse may think moving forward on the road is the wrong direction, but the horse also cannot see the obstacle off to the side.

gtirloni 7y ago

> It doesn't matter how strong or fast the individual horses are, it's much more important that they run together without friction or distraction and support each other. This.