Work Matters

A Great Comment From Kelley Eskridge About Bosses and Control

Written by

supermoxie

in

I have been a huge fan of Kelley Eskridge for awhile now, and have written about her here before and I quote her Good Boss, Bad Boss. I am always especially struck by the power of her writing.  Just yesterday, she wrote a comment in response to my post on authenticity versus the challenge a boss faces of convincing people that he or she is in charge.  Check out a snippet from Kelley's comment:

"Controlling a team is like driving a car. The whole machine can work
wonderfully well, but if no one's at the wheel… Who's driving is
either an agreement, or it's a car crash.
Whenever I work in a situation where someone else is in the lead, I want
that person to assume control. I agree to trust them to have a notion
of where we're going. I do not want to have to backseat drive all the
damn time."

I think that is lovely and emotionally compelling.  It also is consistent with a lot of research on the differences between competent and crummy bosses. 

P.S. I am not entirely sure what Kelley is up to these days; I know she was running Humans at Work and also writing fiction, and has significant management experience.  But her blog suggests she is really focusing on writing fiction these days — clearly, that woman can write!

Comments

32 responses to “A Great Comment From Kelley Eskridge About Bosses and Control”

  1. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  2. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  3. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  4. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  5. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  6. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  7. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  8. Michael Johnson Avatar
    Michael Johnson

    I agree with Kelley to a certain extent, but I think the metaphor of driving a car has limitations. Research on shared leadership and self-managing work teams suggests that you don’t always need a single driver to get stuff done. Teams can function quite well without one person “in control.”
    This is also evident in Web 2.0 initiatives and open-source software coding. In these kinds of projects, no one is really in control, but ideas are put forth that either catch on with the other users or die a natural death.
    I guess I just worry whenever I see comments espousing “control.” It is usually a hard transition, but many organizations are finding that the old “command and control” structures are giving way to more decentralized structures.

    Reply
  9. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  10. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  11. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  12. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  13. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  14. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  15. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  16. Kelley Eskridge Avatar
    Kelley Eskridge

    Bob, thank you! I admire your clarity and your very human take on management/leadership so much, and am honored by your regard.
    Humans At Work was an utter failure as a business. But I’m very grateful for all the support the ideas received. And I continue to make the entire program curriculum available free at the website for anyone who might find it useful.
    I’m running an editing business now, and it reinforces my belief that the kind of skills you talk about so well in Good Boss, Bad Boss make a difference in any work experience. Creating individual relationships with writers in a focused context, geared toward specific results. Communicating as clearly as I can about what people are doing well, and what they can improve. Offering practical suggestions and resources. Nurturing their style as opposed to imposing mine.
    And here we come back to notions of control. I can’t just make vague noises about “writing better” and go off to lunch. I’m the editor; the writer expects me to edit. And then the writer decides whether or not she wants to implement my suggestions. The final product is under her control. I don’t do her job for her: but without my being willing to say “Do this, not that,” she can’t do her job as well.
    To extend (although, I hope, not torture) the metaphor, I have to put my hands on the wheel, and at the same time always remember that it’s her car. Perhaps that’s one of the fundamental balancing acts of control.
    Thanks again, Bob. I always enjoy the conversations here. Makes me happy to see so many people embracing your work!

    Reply
  17. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  18. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  19. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  20. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  21. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  22. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  23. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  24. Corrie Block Avatar
    Corrie Block

    In the West, we cram hyper-individualistic people into an organization, and hire consultants to help them play well together. In metanetworks we have the beneficial foundation of shared history and loyalty between the “employees,” and the social responsibility of businesses is not a new idea here. It seems to me that to develop the strategic function of a family-based organization is much simpler work than to convince individualistic board members and management teams that they are a kind of family.

    Reply
  25. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  26. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  27. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  28. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  29. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  30. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  31. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply
  32. Davor Milicevic Avatar
    Davor Milicevic

    Interesting metaphor, but working in a team requires everyone to participate. One person is driving the team but others are contributing “gas”. No one wants to be a babysitter and it is expected that leader be the one making all the important stops and turns. Control comes not only from leaders’ competence, but also from competent members of the team. In case leader is not present the team needs to function well. It is very similar to sports as you can’t rely only on captain; team has to work as well without one.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts