|
David
Maister is one of the leading writers on management today. Many managers
and consultants love his books, which include titles like True
Professionalism, The Trusted Advisor, First among Equals, and Practice
what you Preach. What makes these books so popular with managers and
professionals must be that they are full of practical advice. On top of
that, they are written in a pleasant and easy style. We were surprised to
find out that writing was once an activity David hated.
Coert- You are now one of the most popular and best-known
management authors. But what got you started writing books?
|
"Whenever I had some writing to do,
I would get agitated, literally sweat and avoid the task like the
plague." |
David - My book writing divides into two
time periods. Until 1985, I was an academic, teaching at the
University of British Columbia and the Harvard Business School. During
that time, I wrote (or co-authored) seven books, on such diverse
subjects as managing a trucking company, the airline industry and
factory operations. All of those books (now, thankfully, out of print
and forgotten) were written to play the academic
game. |
In 1985, I left academia to launch my consulting practice, aimed at
serving professional service firms. In spite of the academic writing I had
done, I still did not enjoy writing. In fact, it terrified me. Whenever I
had some writing to do, I would get agitated, literally sweat and avoid
the task like the plague.
Yet I knew that writing was the best way to get known, and to create an
audience for my work. So, I promised a (trade) magazine editor that I
would write an article every month, knowing full well that I was
committing myself to something that I would not enjoy, but which would get
me where I wanted to go. In addition, it was emotionally easier to think
about writing (only) an article, instead of a book (which seemed like a
monumental task.) Having no choice, I lived up to my commitment and, after
three years, found that about two-thirds of the articles were acceptable,
and about one-third I wished I had not written. I was still insecure about
it, so I did not collect my articles together for another five years, when
I chose the best ones and published them as Managing the Professional
Service Firm. Suddenly, I was "the guy who wrote the book" (which was a
nice feeling.) The book didn't sell that well at first, but nice things
were said about it.
Then, I faced another level of terror. It had taken me 10 years to collect
enough articles for my first book. It was rather like being a pop group
that puts out a successful first album based on everything they had done
in their lives, then had to write another bunch of songs for the second
album in a much shorter time. So, I just kept trying. I made a binding
commitment to send my clients two articles every three months (getting the
ideas from my consulting work.) In four years, I had enough for my second
book. By this time, I was actually finding writing enjoyable, and between
2000 and 2002, I wrote (or coauthored) three more books, and am working on
another one for 2004.
Coert- What do you consider to be the best book you have written
yet and why?
David - Since my motivation in writing books is to help people, my test of my
"best book" is not the writing or the originality of the thinking. Quite
simply, my best book is the one that readers have actually used and
applied the most, and obtained the most benefit from. So, it has to be
Managing the Professional Service Firm, the first book. I like the others,
and many readers do too, but they have not had the impact that the first
book did. Some of them have sold as well as the first book, but I don't
think they have had as big an impact on people's lives. So, by my
definition, they are not my best books.
Coert- Your book ´Practice what you preach´ provides impressive
proof of the causal relationship between how you treat people and
objective success measures. I noticed this research confirmed the value of
some ideas you have been writing about for many years. What do you
consider to be its main message? Were there also big surprises in the
outcomes of this research, things you had not expected at all?
David - I was surprised and delighted by the findings in this research. I set
out to test some hypotheses, and worked hard to keep my own biases out of
it, and let the data speak for itself. Yet, the conclusions confirmed much
of what I had written before. As I tell my clients: "The bad news is I
still believe the crazy things I have told you before; the worse news is
that I now have proof!"
The main message is very straightforward: you make the most money in a
business when your people are energized, excited and enthused. Notice,
that is not the same as "be nice to people" or "keep your staff happy."
What you need to do in business to succeed is not very intellectually
complicated. However, you do need lots of passion, ambition, drive and
discipline to get it done. It really is similar to my experience in my
career. I honestly believe that most of my books have been common sense.
My competitive advantage, if I have one, is not my intelligence. Instead,
it is that, that while many people could have written about the things I
wrote, they didn't and I did. I got it done. That's an important message.
The second message of the book is that few people can sustain energy,
excitement and enthusiasm on their own. Few of us have that amount of
self-discipline. (That's why I made binding promises to people to force me
to write.) Most of us need a good coach, i.e. a manager, to bring out the
best in us. The study is very clear that the source of energy, drive and
discipline is not the systems of the firm, but the talents of the
individual manager. That's quite an important conclusion, since few
managers are actually taught how to manage. (They are taught business, but
that's a separate subject.)
|
The biggest surprise in the study, which
I did not anticipate at all, was how important was the character of
the manager. Not his or her skills, or knowledge, or behavior, but
character. Words like "trust, "honorable", "clear principles," "person
of integrity" were frequently used to describe the managers who got
the most out of people, and hence made the most money. I was taught
that management was about processes, and systems, and knowledge and,
maybe, skill. |
"I was taught that management was about
processes, and systems, and knowledge and, maybe, skill. The data
suggests that, while these are important, character is most crucial." |
The data suggests that, while these are important, character is most
crucial. I'm not sure many businesses choose their managers primarily on
character. And they should, if my data is to be believed.
Coert- Who are your favorite management authors? Are there any
management books you would really like to recommend our readers? (which
are mostly managers, human resources professionals, management consultants
and students management and organization)
David - Everyone who has to deal with people has to read Dale Carnegie's
"How to Win Friends and Influence People." It's the most
important business book ever written. (Seriously!) Next, I'd choose
Kouzes and Posner "The Leadership Challenge." Full of wisdom,
full of practical suggestions. I frequently re-read Gerald Weinberg's "Secrets
of Consulting," which is applicable to everyone. I also read (and
recommend) everything
Tom Peters writes. Even if you only agree with a fraction of
what he says, you get more ideas and stimulus to thinking than five other
books.
Coert- A bit of an experimental question: imagine your new book
would come out and a real miracle would happen! Everybody would read it
and understand it and implement all of its insights and wisdom. Perhaps
unlikely, but remember this is a miracle ... After this miracle would have
happened from what things would we notice things were different?
DM- The miracle would be that we would all understand how human beings
work a little bit better. It's a tragedy that nowhere in our education do
we receive any guidance in how to deal with the people we interact with,
either in personal life or professional life. Our education works on our
rationality, our logic and our intelligence, but we get no help, for
example, in learning how to deal with other people's emotions or, for that
matter, our own. Did anyone ever teach you how to critique your spouse in
such a way that your comments were received as helpful advice instead of
an attack? How do you get other people to willingly do what you want? What
do you do if someone has let you down? These are all important skills we
must learn, but most of us have to develop them through trial and error. I
don't think I have many of the answers, but I think, at age 56, I have
learned a few lessons that I
would
love to share with people in their twenties, so they can avoid the
mistakes I made.
Too many people think business is about logic, analysis, rationality,
detached discussions and being "right." It's not. Business is about
people's messy emotions, whether they are clients, superiors, subordinates
or colleagues.
Coert- On our site there is a lively discussion about
developments in the profession of consultants? Questions discussed are:
isn't the consultancy profession stagnating? Aren't consultants often too
superficial and too commercial (especially the large firms)? Aren't they
too much led by hypes? Isn't consultancy becoming too standardized? What
are your thoughts on these topics?
David - One of the difficulties of talking about consultancy is that it
actually covers an incredibly wide range of activities, many of which have
nothing to do with each other. For example, designing and installing an IT
system has nothing to do with providing strategic advice, which has
nothing to do with factory productivity improvement. How the people
provide value, how they interact with their clients, the definition of
quality, what skills are needed, all of these vary incredibly.
|
"There is a world of difference between
being able to solve a client's problem, and being able to help the
client solve his or her own problem." |
For me, the most important distinction
is the difference between being an expert and an advisor/counselor.
The expert's job is to be "right", and to have the technical skills to
solve problems. However, the advisor/counselor's job is not to be
right, but to be helpful. There is a world of difference between being
able to solve a client's problem, and being able to help the client
solve his or her own problem. I think one of the problems that the
consulting profession has today, is that there are too many "experts"
and not enough "advisor/counselors." The reason is clear. |
To be an advisor, you must not only know your field, but you need very
advanced skills in working with clients (and client organizations) to help
them solve their own problems. The IT firms don't usually do this, and the
strategy firms often don't do this. They are still selling brains or ideas
or insights. It isn't just strategy versus implementation. So much of
what's called implementation is still the outsider doing things "for" or "to"
the client organization. It's not improving the client organization.
As a result, the benefits to the client are limited, and clients are
becoming skeptical of the value of consulting. A lot of firms think they
are addressing this by selling "change management," but what they do is
still not counseling: it's running the client through a relatively fixed
methodology of processes, many of them bureaucratic. By the way, I include
myself in this problem. Often, I can see what the client needs to do, and
can get the client to understand that it needs to be done. But getting it
done (dealing with politics, resistance, fear, turf battles, the need for
consensus) really stretches my skills as a counselor. The process that is
required is emotionally charged, and I was never trained in this. And, of
course, few other consultants are either.
Coert- You mentioned that business is about people's messy
emotions; an intriguing point that I fully agree with. Both clients and
consultants seem to find it hard to deal with this fact. Do you have any
suggestions for consultants how to deal with this?
The first battle is to accept that it's all about emotions, and not resent
the fact that the emotions get in the way of your logic. It's also
important to recognize that this is not only about other people's messy
emotions, but your own. It's telling that Daniel Goleman put "self
management" as one of the first elements of emotional intelligence in his
book of that name.
Let me give an example. A year or so ago, my wife, Kathy, turned to me and
said "David, can I get your help?" Of course, I said yes. She said "Well,
when we travel, we are usually lucky enough to stay in hotel suites, and
your smoking doesn't bother me. But, occasionally, we are in small hotel
rooms, and I find that, then, the smoke makes my eyes itchy. What do you
think I should do about that?"
This is, of course, brilliant. She had every right to be angry, but she
knew that expressing her anger would reduce the chances of my cooperation,
not increase it. She had every right to criticize me, but she knew that,
when attacked, people attack back. She did not approach the problem as a
logical, rational one to be "solved," but an interpersonal, psychological,
emotional one. She was less concerned about being right, and more
concerned about getting what she wanted.
How do you learn this? Some reading can help, including Goleman's book.
But mostly it's practice, preferably with a colleague to watch you, so you
can discuss afterwards "Was there a better way to say that?"
Coert- I think there is great consistency in your thinking and
your books (and I like that). But what is new in your thinking? What are
things you're discovering / learning about now? What are you curious about?
Do you have future plans you would like to say something about?
|
DM- As I said in the introduction to
Managing the Professional Service Firm, "All theory is autobiography."
I am fascinated by who succeeds and why, and I don't think I have
finished my explorations. Most authors and consultants tend to tackle
bigger subjects |
"Follow your passion, not your logic."
|
as they progress (for example as Michael Porter did when he went from the
competitive advantage of companies to studying the competitive advantage
of nations.) I have been tempted to do that, because my clients ask about
"big" subjects like mergers, and globalization, and technology.
But, to tell the truth, those things don't interest me. My path has been
to go deeper and look at finer detail. I think there's still a lot that I
don't understand about dealing with people, managing, working with clients,
and I see a lot of my clients also needing to improve in those areas. At
the moment, I am writing a book for young professionals on the secrets of
building a successful career. Its (tentative) title is "Stumbling Upwards."
After that, I'll wait to see where my passions take me. My business
principle has always been "Follow your passion, not your logic." So far,
that principle has served me well
Coert
Visser (coert.visser@planet.nl)
is a consultant, coach and trainer using the solution-focused approach to
organizational and individual change. This approach is focused on simply helping
individuals, teams and organizations to make progress in the direction of their
own choice. Coert wrote many articles and a few books.
More information:
www.m-cc.nl /
www.m-cc.nl/solutionfocusedchange.htm /
Dutch network /
Dutch blog,
http://solutionfocusedchange.blogspot.com
|