On Herding Cats

[matt_arnold]

I'm bringing this up on my personal blog rather than my blog about Lojban because its lessons are broadly applicable to things that a lot of you are interested in, so I'd like to get your feedback.

Comments

[tlatoani]

This is going to sound like a lecture, but I haven't really tried to convey this in writing before, so bear with me. In the spirit of your LJ's name, I'm going to criticize your trust/betrayal thing. There's a management concept here that you might not have encountered yet, and it's especially important because volunteers are a limited resource. The fact is, different people are good at different things, and if you can learn how to identify what people are good at, you maximize use of your resources. This sometimes has to be done through trial and error.

If you dismiss someone as untrustworthy across the board because they didn't deliver everything they should have, then you lose that resource. If, on the other hand, you think in terms of "what is this person actually good at, or what do they actually deliver on, and how can I put them on those tasks" then you may be able to turn a problem volunteer into a very useful one.

It's very satisfying to look at things as black and white -- "X is untrustworthy; I will have no further dealings with him" -- and there are people who would agree with that approach. But the fact is, few people are completely useless, especially smart people. Almost all of them are good for something, even if they're really bad at other things. A good manager identifies what those things are and puts the people to use.

Another aspect of this (and I think you've figured some of this out already) is that different people need different levels of structure -- reminders, organization, and/or supervision. You may find that some people who are awful performers with the hands-off supervision you probably prefer for yourself can become great performers if you put a little bit of pressure on them. Similarly, micromanaging some people will actually make them do less (or quit), but for others, it's necessary. There's no such thing as an effective one-size-fits-all management style; the only way to ultimately make it work is to be an asshole and sack anyone who doesn't work well with your chosen style. That's fine (though still wasteful) if you're Donald Trump and have applicants lined up outside your door, but it doesn't work if you're trying to put on an all-volunteer event.

Finally, some people can become great performers if you work with them a bit to develop their skills or organization. This isn't always practical in a volunteer context -- I didn't learn all of this working on cons -- but it can be depending on the situation. Cons often do this through formal or informal "apprenticeships", which for example is how some of the ConFusion chairs have been trained up. There are other ways of doing it too.

Now... all of this said, there are some people who really do prove themselves useless. Maybe they're basket cases who can't deliver on anything, or they require so much of your energy you'd be better off without them, or they're so dysfunctional that their presence on your team chases away other volunteers. Ditch them gently (because they're probably also potential con members). But don't write people off simply for failing to deliver on something. The failure may actually be -- and often is -- a failure of management.

And don't use the "herding cats" metaphor as an excuse not to manage. Remember that you often can get cats to go where you want them to, you just have to make them want to do it. Most people who volunteer for something want to do it right. They just may need some help.

[tlatoani]

Damn, that's long. Sorry. I've usually done this verbally.

[matt_arnold]

I should clarify that I have a completely different standard for a leader who convinces me to join the team, and those whom I've convinced to join the team. I take it personally when I'm actively sold a spurious bill of goods by a leader, and dread the possibility of passing it down the chain, but toward the reluctant volunteers I don't feel resentment, just frustration. Some of them are only in it to do me a favor because I begged them to, after all. I've been in their position-- heck, I still am half the time-- and I know what it's like.

By the way, no, I do not like to be managed in a hands-off style. I want to talk about what I'm doing incessantly for heaven's sake. If nobody is checking my progress, my work must not be important to anybody, so that makes me care about it less. This is especially true if I'm doing a favor to solve something which I consider to be fundamentally Not My Problem. I'm only a good Head of Programming or program book designer because I dislike seeing those jobs done badly. While helping Rachel scrub her new apartment last weekend I realized that on most tasks, if I do a bad job I don't even know why it's bad.

[tlatoani]

By the way, no, I do not like to be managed in a hands-off style. I want to talk about what I'm doing incessantly for heaven's sake. If nobody is checking my progress, my work must not be important to anybody, so that makes me care about it less.

In that case, why don't we schedule a marketing coalition summit at ConFusion -- when we'll have most of the people we need in one place anyway?

[matt_arnold]

That would be unfortunate, since my time at a convention is extremely precious. But I see the reason for it. Let's keep it short.