Monitoring is not Management… in any realm

I read a good article today entitled “Monitoring is not Management” in a blog on a greentech company website (http://bit.ly/a9WIBd). The subject was data center systems; in particular, energy consumption in such systems. Check it out, if that’s your cup of tea.

What struck me, though — besides being a pretty good, comprehensive summary (if that’s not too oxymoronic) on the subject — was the same distinction can be made when it come to managing or leading people. Have you ever met a supervising manager, regardless of title or level in the hierarchy, who thought their principal role was to monitor their people’s performance and document it in a formal evaluation? Or a project manager whose main focus — can’t really call it a contribution — was to monitor project progress? To the extreme of watching that person, or that project, slowly but inexorably fail right in front of them? Observe and report. Wasn’t there a bad comic film called that recently? Monitoring is absolutely not enough!

In keeping with the erstwhile theme of this blog, I need a wilderness analogy. So here it is: Whitewater paddlers in rafts, kayaks and canoes all learn and practice the art of reading water. It’s a critical skill employed in getting downstream safely, especially when confronting big water or very technical runs. It involves scouting the river ahead of you, with a particular emphasis on seeing currents, eddys, holes, ledges, obstacles and other hazards that must be negotiated… and which failing to negotiate could seriously wreck your day. In a word, it’s monitoring river conditions. But what if, having gathered all this data about the river, you did nothing with it to select or alter your planned route, tactics, maneuvers for proceeding downstream? What if you didn’t use that data to put safety measures in place, even prepare for emergency rescue in the worst case? It would the height of foolishness; it would in fact be downright nuts!

The same is true for business, and it is a management imperative. The ability to translate metrics-driven data and keen observations of people at work into concrete actions that lead to better performance is one of the defining characteristics of what a manager should be. It is the hallmark of a leader. It’s what managers should be measured — and managed — on. Failing in this regard is the whitewater equivalent of running your boat and its crew straight into a deadly hydraulic that you could easily see and avoid. Don’t settle for any manager who only monitors. It’s a recipe for disaster.

Unknown's avatar

About joehawkins80

I am a veteran technology exec with expertise in software product development, service delivery, and operational excellence... on permanent sabbatical. Now focused on research, investigation and immersion in really cool adventures. Mostly outdoors. Occasional guide, strictly barter system. Free advice.
This entry was posted in On Tech Management. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Monitoring is not Management… in any realm

  1. Tom Harrison's avatar Tom Harrison says:

    Joe —

    Great post!

    I saw the title of your post and was intrigued — one of the things I am interested and involved in at work is monitoring electricity and energy (household, but same idea) — and I laughed, because one of the vendors that makes an energy monitor we sell insists on calling it “home energy management”. It’s a monitor. The person that takes the time to look at the data from the monitor, analyze and understand it, then make a decision about what action to take is the manager.

    (This kind of semantics is why I’ll never make a very good marketing guy 🙂

    Monitoring is an important and necessary prerequisite to management. It’s not the same thing.

    Tom

Leave a comment