Several years ago, a leading management magazine wrote about the increasing pressure experienced by middle management. Across all organizations and sectors. Recognizable internationally. It appears to be—and proves to be—a universal issue. In various studies and publications on the topic, there is broad agreement about the causes and consequences. And even though the research is a few years old, it is still relevant today—perhaps even more relevant than ever.
The Causes
According to these studies, middle management includes many new or inexperienced leaders. Many of them come from content-focused roles and often from within their own team. Usually the best-performing employee—the top of the class. And that person is suddenly expected to lead. Often without proper training and not always with the right guidance.
There are also many leaders in this category who have been in their roles for a very long time and have reached their limit. They have been doing things the same way for years. Meanwhile, expectations have shifted dramatically. A different leadership style is now required. No longer based on content expertise, and certainly not on authority. But this shift often does not fit who they are.
This already illustrates the large differences between leaders, even within the same organization. This frequently leads to clashes, mutual misunderstanding, and suboptimal collaboration. They tend to stay on their own department islands, which limits cohesion.
On top of that, much more is being asked of middle management than before. Organizational changes follow one another faster than ever. Driven by market pressures, legislation and regulation, and frequent changes at the top of organizations, which often trigger new strategic directions. All these changes must be translated through organization and ultimately communicated to the work floor via middle management.
The work floor, however, does not always feel heard or engaged, resulting in resistance. This puts middle management right in the squeeze—pressured from above and below. It demands a fundamentally different type of leadership.
Content expertise alone is no longer enough to get people on board with change. The management layer is expected to deliver something different than before: less content, more leadership and change management capabilities. This often clashes with existing expectations. Shouldn’t a manager primarily be an expert? Team members need someone to spar with, doesn’t that require deep content knowledge?
The conclusion is clear: “leadership is a profession!” I see this every day in conversations with clients. Across all sectors and all organization sizes. The issues are highly universal—but the solutions always require a tailored approach.
The Consequences
The effects range from high workload, increased absenteeism, and elevated turnover to dissatisfaction on the work floor and at the top. Middle management is creaking under pressure. And yet it is crucial to the success of organizations—especially in periods of change and transition. Because of the challenges mentioned, organizations risk delays, miscommunication, or failure to detect and address resistance.
The importance of middle management is almost universally acknowledged. Years ago, many organizations tried self-managing or self-organizing teams. In many cases, these experiments have been reversed and leadership roles reinstated.
Fortunately, we are seeing positive shifts. More focus on management skills and less on content expertise. Organizations increasingly recognize the importance of this and are investing more in developing leadership as a profession.
In recruitment and selection processes, this shift is reflected in job profiles: they are less rigidly defined by content expertise and more by leadership, change management experience, and personality. Letting go of content requirements can feel risky, but in practice, hiring someone with a different background often enriches the organization and the team.
Another development is a shift from the individual manager to the team. More focus on leveraging knowledge and expertise within the team, as well as different leadership styles, personalities, and drivers. Individual leadership development and team development go hand in hand. Understanding each other’s strengths and weaknesses makes the team stronger.
These are valuable trajectories for organizations, teams, and employees. They deliver quick results for the organization, and employees feel more valued and supported in their roles. The squeeze itself doesn’t disappear, but leaders become far better equipped to handle it effectively.
Leadership is a profession. And not something you do on the side.
Written by Mark Olman, CFR Global Executive Search the Netherlands
Photo source: Freepik