Hey Babs, “Gravy Train” and “You’re Fired”

Babs pokes at managerialism, restructuring, reorganizing, and outsourcing judgement.

Hey Babs,

In 2022 and again in 2024 we worked with a management consultant on finding the best structure and organization for managing our mid-sized public sector organization. We have almost 300 unionized employees of which the majority deliver direct services to the public at different locations across the city. 

As the CEO, I work closely with an executive team of nine who work closely with the 42 non-unionized managers and team leads. Additionally, we have unionized shift and department supervisors who are responsible for administrative work such as submitting scheduling and payroll data into our enterprise system. 

The management consultant encouraged us to increase the management team so that the executive team and I could focus on strategy and external goals. Since 2022 we have grown from an executive team of five to nine and from a management team of 30 to 42.

In addition to lessening day-to-day management among the executive team, I felt that this growth was key to avoiding middle management burnout, increasing staff engagement, and improving productivity and services. 

In January, our key government funder questioned the budget line for exempt managers. One elected official went so far as to ask if I was “enjoying the taxpayer-funded ride on the gravy train”. I was unprepared for this line of hostile questioning and engaged another management consultant to review our management structure and organization. 

Last week I received the consultant’s report, and I am flummoxed by her findings. I feel strongly that we have the right manager to employee ratio and was surprised that the consultant is not only recommending reductions in both the executive and middle management teams, she is also recommending a reorganization of the work and how we think about leadership and management. If I follow her recommendations I will be firing two executive managers and nine middle managers by the end of summer.

I am not a “your fired” kind of leader.

I expect that you might have some kind words for this flummoxed CEO. 

Thanks, E.R.C.

——-

Hey E.R.C., 

I do have some kind words, but not all of them will be easy to hear.

Your intentions with the expansion of the executive and management teams sound well-founded and in the best interests of the organization’s business and people.

I don’t have the consultant’s report or recommendations, they could be completely wrong-headed or brilliant, it doesn’t matter (other than you paid for it) because what matters is what you do with the report and how you do it. 

The report is information for you to use wisely and with discernment. To channel Brené Brown, don’t outsource your judgement. It is up to you to ensure that your decisions and actions are ethical and aligned with your leadership values and the needs of the organization. As such it is important to not accept or dismiss the report outright but to be curious, ask questions, and poke into what is working and what is not with your current executive and management structure and organization, and to ask “why?”.

A handful of questions. 

I have a handful of questions for you that will hopefully open up a bit of space in which to move from feeling flummoxed to feeling curious and confident.

My questions aren’t easy, and I encourage you, as a kindness to yourself, to not “yeah yeah” them or try to give the answers you think you want. Get curious, get under the hood of your executive and management team structure, organization and results, and go deep into what is working and what could be better. 

1. What is the big “why” or purpose of your executive and management teams?
2. As a result of the 2022 and 2024 changes have you, as mentioned in your letter:
   • Avoided or at least lessened middle management burnout. Findings are showing that not only is this burnout increasing across sectors, but that it isn’t just about the number of direct reports or portfolio responsibilities (although too much work will contribute to it). Middle management burnout is significantly related to lack of role clarity and authority (in my opinion tied to lack of psychological safety) and a lack of feeling the satisfaction of tangible results that comes with the never ending work of managing processes and people rather than let’s say building a shed, knitting a scarf, or fixing a car. In other words, middle management, despite or maybe because of the rise of managerialism, still feels like being stuck in the middle with nothing to show for it. 
   • Increased staff engagement. Hopefully not with just a wellness campaign and parfait Fridays but genuine engagement that is about how trust shows up on the floor and in the workroom, how questions are asked and answered, how mistakes are repaired, and how people are valued and believe there is a purpose to their work no matter what the work is.
   • Improved productivity and services. I trust that by improvement we are talking about being smart and effective rather than increasing numbers but being performative and useless (a common criticism of managerialism).
3. What evidence or research have the past and current consultant provided? What is missing? What else do you need to know?
4. If implemented, how might this latest consultant recommendation (or recommendations) benefit the leading and managing of your organization differently from the 2022 and 2024 recommendations? What are the risks? How will you track, measure, and assess the benefits and risks? 
5. Why would you stay with the status quo?
6. Why would you downsize?
7. Who, maybe someone in your professional network, might you talk with about the nitty-gritty of the report and how you are feeling about it?

A few extra thoughts.

1. Needing to downsize with the consequence of letting people go should never feel good. If it does, it isn’t courageous leadership. But as unfortunate as this is, if you choose to do so, it can be done with compassion, support, and dignity. It also isn’t the same as being fired. Yes, they have just lost their livelihood and will now face one of life’s big stresses, and may suffer awful consequences, but they aren’t being fired or dismissed as a result of unacceptable work or behaviour. Make that clear and know that while it most likely won’t make the moment better, it may help put them in a better position for taking the next steps. Using the word “fired”, even to yourself, confuses the situation and doesn’t support finding the best path through it. 
2. Some organizations, I don’t know if it’s yours or not, have run amok with managerialism and do have too many executives and managers, even if the ratio to employees looks good on paper. This can result in lowering staff morals, productivity, and innovation through:
   • Decision-making bottlenecks where engaged smart staff can barely make a move without it having to be run up the decision-making chain. 
   • Micro-management. Either people know how to do their work or they don’t, but micromanagement isn’t the solution, it’s a problem.
   • Managers take on all the interesting creative work such as problem-solving or coming up with an improved service or process idea leaving those smart engaged staff feeling undervalued and ready to leave, even when they keep coming into work. 
3. The number of executives and managers doesn’t speak to the quality of their leadership and management skills. Except when it does in a not flattering way. The shortcut of adding more to the team, rather than dealing with what or who is challenging the effectiveness of the team, is a sure fire way of looking like it’s a “gravy train” (I so dislike this phrase) to outside funders, community members, and staff. 

Thank you.

Thank you E.R.C.! I know that you aren’t the only one out there in this time of financial uncertainty and funder scrutiny who is feeling the pressure to right-size the team and prove results. 

And thank you dear community for taking time to read this. If this, or any of the other topics that are shared in my posts, prompts curiosity about working with a coach to support you through some of the more challenging aspects of being a courageous leader, let’s talk. You can book a complimentary 30-minute chat by emailing me at [email protected] or through the contact form on my website where you can also find out more about how we can work together. 

Babs

P.S. 

I will be leaving Substack and publishing on my own website at the end of May. I’m counting on all of you to resubscribe and to let others know about this newsletter as the Courageous Leaders community continues to grow.

There are still a small number of spots left for coaching and facilitated events this season. I very much want to work with you, so please reach out before it is too late! Email me at [email protected]. 

---

Bonus note on restructuring and reorganizing. 

Management structure and organization are two different things, and it is advisable to be specific about the terms. A starting place is:

• The executive and management structure often describes how things get done such as who reports into who and the lines of authority and decision-making. The structure coordinates the work to minimize redundancy, stepping on toes, kingdom building, and bottlenecks in decision-making or authority.
• Organization, when referring to the executive and management teams (different from the whole organization) is about their purpose and goals as a team and as individuals. The organization drives why the executive and management roles exist such as for strategy, administration, staff management and coaching, oversight and management of process, service, and product.
• While restructuring and reorganizing frequently go together, if they are conflated as one, as too often happens, it can become a game of moving the sticky notes around the board rather than engaging with the hard work of having the best people doing the best work for the best results. 
• Simplistically (because there are many reasons to have one manager with 20 direct reports and another manager with 3 direct reports), if we divide 300 employees among 42 middle managers, there is a management to employee ratio of one to seven. This would be considered by many management consultants to be an ideal ratio. But it is only ideal if the structure and organization, and the work of the people in the structure and organization, are achieving what is needed.

---

Photo by Imagine Buddy on Unsplash