|
Q: What’s
the best approach for leading creative people, and does it
really differ from leading everyone else? Joe Burke, Los
Angeles
A: In a
word, yes.
Leading
creative types, who often don’t think of themselves as
employees of anyone or anything—let alone followers
embedded in an organization consisting of levels, layers
and moving parts—is about as far from Management 101 as
you can get. In fact it’s an art, drawing on all sorts of
soft skills like empathy, nurturing and ad-hoc
psychological counseling. But what a mistake if you lead
creative people from your heart and stop there.
Managing
creative people also requires—it even demands—a measure of
authority. Nothing heavy-handed, of course. You don’t want
your resident “out-of-boxers” running for the exits. With
their fresh ideas and unique perspectives, they can be,
and often are, the reason for breakthrough products and
new ways of working and even the impetus for whole new
businesses.
Still,
creative people must know that boundaries and values
exist, and they have to respect them. If they don’t,
creative people have a way of going off the rails—and
taking the workaday core of the company with them.
Now, we
realize that the “velvet hammer” part of the approach we
recommend is somewhat counter to the conventional wisdom
about managing creative types, which runs that you should
leave alone writers, editors, artists, software designers,
engineers, research scientists and even a few particularly
inventive investment bankers. They’re different from you
and me, the thinking goes—deeper, more mysteriously wired,
more fragile. Treat them like worker bees and they sting.
Treat them like hallowed Yodas and their wisdom flows.
We’d be
tempted to blow off this view as nonsense, except that
some of it is true. The most creative people can be
intellectually complex and emotionally delicate; they
often are. They can be odd or prickly. Some are quite
antisocial. Many started hating the status quo in grade
school and have never stopped. Who knows whether those
traits are due to the way their brains work or the way
most societies allow (and even encourage) artistic types
to act.
Regardless, true creatives do seem to shut down when
squeezed into normal strictures, and good managers need to
be wary of that.
But
businesses are not museums. They don’t exist to showcase
creative output, but to capitalize on it. And for that to
happen, something has to give—namely, the typical creative
person’s underlying notion that he’s a free agent.
It is as
one creative employee—a gifted writer who used to miss
deadlines with abandon—once told one of us, “You’re not
the boss of me.” Technically, he was flat wrong, but not
in his own mind.
Now, many
creative types do accept basic organizational principles
and procedures. They push boundaries but do not cross
them, and, as a result, their teams and organizations
forge ahead.
But too
often, companies also contain creative types who are so
exquisitely talented that their “buck-the-system”
behaviors get a pass: The brilliant scientist who treats
his young associates like serfs. The award-winning art
director who scoffs at corporate pleas for cost-cutting.
The ingenious video-game designer who won’t talk to the
marketing department.
Outrageous
behaviors, yes. But when the creatives displaying them are
good enough, many managers look away. Who wants to shoot
the goose who lays the golden eggs? The problem, though,
is that negative behaviors tend to be highly contagious
among creatives.
After all,
many of them are already acting against type in company
settings. They’re conforming far more than they’d like.
And so, any hint that they can “be real” is seized. The
next thing you know, dysfunctional behaviors start to
spread. People start working when and where they want,
which usually means alone. They stop sharing ideas with
mainstream “grunts.” Often, they start sniping at each
other over, ironically, creative differences.
Such
freedom may be a relief, if not a thrill, for the creative
employees who are enjoying it. But it’s usually agony for
the regular employees, who start to feel like
disenfranchised outsiders.
“Why do
the creatives get so much slack,” they wonder, “and we get
none?” That’s a question conducive to only two kinds of
environment: chaos or stalemate.
This
leaves leaders in a unique, but not irresolvable, bind.
To win in
the marketplace, leaders absolutely must respect the
individuality of creative people. They are different. But
if you want your organization to cohere and thrive, you
must make sure they keep that difference within bounds.
Yes, some
creatives might balk; some might even walk. But remember,
you are indeed “the boss” of them—and everyone else. For
the sake of the organization, you need to act that way.
|