A frequent and related complaint of line people is that the staff man, with his strong sense of mission, makes a proposal that has a sound theoretical basis, but is totally inappropriate to his urgency and priorities. Here is a case in point.

Too often, the internal consultant sees only the aspects of a particular situation that relate to his special interests. Thus, when he constructs a solution to the problem, he takes into account only a small portion of the factors in a particular situation. One organization succeeded in broadening its human resources executive viewpoint by giving him responsibility for business planning and the integration of appropriate corporate staff knowledge, skills, and abilities. When he went out to visit with a division manager and his staff, his focus was not limited to executive manpower planning; he would arrange to have corporate staff representatives meet with their line management counterparts when the time came to put together an intermediate-range plan. In the process, a total corporate planning system evolved which was endorsed and supported by both line and staff personnel. This put an end to fragmented, partial solutions to problems, and it brought order to the visitation schedule and minimized disruptions in the workday of busy line managers.

Line managers are given to tossing a problem to the staff consultant and expecting an immediate solution. Ideally, a decision is arrived at jointly by line and staff after free and open consultation. More typically, the human resources executive comes up with an idea-for example, analysis of profitability by one product in order to evaluate each salesman true contribution to business results, then finds that he is expected to do the job of obtaining a profit-ability analysis by item.

Thus the shifting emphasis on the use of staff consultants to produce significant improvement in the performance of line activities must be accepted and acted upon to maintain the consultant credibility. Yet, if he does not understand the system and the key relationships, he cannot solve a problem and indeed may aggravate it. Witness the case of a consultant selling a product distribution computer analysis to the marketing executive. If the marketing executive buys the analysis he is in for trouble unless he understands its potential impact on inventories, warehouse locations, retailer needs, lead time, and factory schedules. A great deal more than just freight costs is involved.

Line managers appreciate the benefit of a technique they may delegate the responsibility for obtaining results and then fail to follow-up and implement the projects or ideas. Example: A division manager who had a problem in synchronizing the goals and activities of engineering, marketing, and manufacturing asked the human resources executive to help establish a product planning committee. At the first meeting, the human resources executive was left to run the meeting, despite his efforts to bounce the ball back to the division manager. The operational way was established; agenda priorities were defined, and a plan was evolved by the group to coordinate the departments activities. But it took two subsequent meetings to get the division manager to approve action that he had previously agreed with. While he appreciated the technique, he was reluctant to delegate the operating authority necessary to implement recommendations.

Frequently, busy internal consultants shift their schedules and put in long hours to accommodate a line manager\’s call for help. After much preparation and careful scheduling, the consultant may find that he is receiving relatively little help or information from the manager or his people.

These problems of reluctance have some deeper implications. The line manager may be wary of the staff consultant new tools and techniques because, to his way of thinking, the body of knowledge and experience on which he has built his career may no longer be adequate to the needs of the job; a weakness may be exposed; his career may crumble. It is not unusual for staff innovations to require the line manager to operate in new ways, as well as to think in new ways. So the behavior and empathy of the staff trainer are most important in bringing about behavior change in the line manager.

Author Bio: http://sites.google.com/site/cliptheschoolbeginning/ http://sites.google.com/site/arturvictoriasite/

Category: Business
Keywords: Business, Organization, Structure, capital, Development, Credit, Sales, Communication, Resources, Em