With staffing budgets often tight, one way to reduce costs is to eliminate the middle manager role. I had two bad experiences in my career with middle managers, so I don’t think this is necessarily a bad idea.
However, since my experiences with middle managers were frequently unfavorable, I’m looking at this role through a biased lens. What if a middle manager is great at their job? What could they contribute to their work team?
Self-Guided Learning
An article by Alisa Cohn in Forbes explores a middle manager-less world. Cohn points out the benefits middle managers provide, which employees will have to compensate for on their own.
For example, Cohn notes that, rather than waiting to receive training and guidance from their manager, employees may need to seek it out themselves: “Proactively investing in your own learning—even if you don’t have a manager prodding you to do so—is a way to future-proof your career.”
Learning professionals in a company where the middle manager role is eliminated will need to think about how to compensate for the loss of the people who are guiding employees’ learning, nudging them to complete their curriculum, and apply the lessons to their jobs.
Loss of Communication Buffer
Another thing a middle manager can do is act as a communication buffer between the employee and the head of the department. That could be good or bad. If the middle manager is a fair person with the interests of their employees in mind, it can work out nicely. This is especially true if the middle manager happens to be an effective communicator.
Problems arise when the middle manager doesn’t have the best interests of their employees in mind because they see one, or more of them, as potential competitors. Another potential challenge is the middle manager who means well, but is not good at communicating. They don’t adequately communicate information from the department head to their work team, and, conversely, they don’t pass accurate information about the team upwards.
If the middle manager who was removed was good at doing both of those things, the employee will have to improve their interpersonal skills, along with the ability to stay calm and diplomatic.
An effective middle manager takes potentially bad news from the department head and then communicates it to the team in a way that’s manageable and easier to digest. When that buffer is taken away, the employee will be hearing everything from the source, and that source may not be the most sensitive or tactful person. “One of the most important skills you can build is emotional regulation. Work can be intense, often frustrating. It’s easy to get caught up in your own emotions and—since emotions are catching—other people’s as well,” Cohn warns.
The loss of middle managers may mean the need for more communication training, including lessons on managing challenging news.
Need for Employees to Build Own Career Networks
A great middle manager will help their employees network, introducing them to important people in the company and the industry they work in. These networks also can be essential for helping employees to problem solve.
If there is middle manager, an employee will have to understand how to do that for themselves.
Cohn notes that employees with no middle manager will have to build their own networks. She writes that it’s especially important for employees with no middle manager to build both their internal and external networks.
Like communication skills, network-building often is taken for granted as something people automatically know how to do, or can easily learn how to do on their own. When middle managers are scaled back, or eliminated altogether, a training program that gives employees strategies for effectively building networks could be highly useful. It can boost productivity by enabling employees to get the information and help they need inside the company as fast as possible, and it can help the employee make connections outside the company that could result in sales leads and industry partnership opportunities.
Having middle managers—when they are effective and well-intentioned—can be a big advantage to employees. If you’re going to cut back on this aspect of your corporate hierarchy, it’s important to prepare your workforce for the change.
Is the role of middle manager still strong in your organization, or have you cut back on this role? If so, how do you ensure employees are able to compensate for this loss of support?