Fishbowls, aquariums and oceans. How to manage not being a fish out of water.

Management. Fish. What?

Let’s start our aquatic management journey with a fishbowl. Many of us can remember having a goldfish – maybe you won yours at a carnival, or maybe you were bought one to be your first “pet” so you could prove your responsibility before mom and dad put the life of a dog or cat in your hands. I had a goldfish, his name was “Barry”; I have no idea why I named him that. About a week later, I had another goldfish, “Barry 2”, a short while thereafter came “Barry 3”. They never met each other.

Barry and his successors lived their (short) lives in the same tiny fish bowl, the size of which you might think of when thinking of that first goldfish. Barry swam back and forth, and as you might imagine, it didn’t take him too long to get from one side to the other. I fed Barry and he swam. And I fed him more, and he swam more. And I might have fed him too much, and he floated. But enough about Barry’s swimming and overeating habits – think of his fishbowl. It was small and constrained any freedom he may have had or wanted. At the same time, had he been dropped in an ocean, he’d have been overwhelmed, and likely (literally) eaten alive. Ideally, Barry would have lied in an aquarium in my room. He’d have had room, and maybe even lasted long enough to meet some friends.

The same applies to your employees. As a manager, you need to find them an aquarium. Too many rules and bureaucratic structures in place will stifle your employees. Micromanagement serves that master as well and puts your employees in that fishbowl. But micromanagement isn’t always a conscious activity; micromanagement often finds its roots in a desire for high quality output – but you know what they say about the road to hell. For 40 years we’ve seen that employees, especially in a Western context, crave autonomy, the ability to participate¹ and the opportunity to be in charge of their work.  Give them a task, or even an end-goal, and let them create the path.

But, if autonomy is a good thing, is there too much of a good thing? You may have heard of the “Inverted U” – a phenomenon often demonstrated² whereby the relationship between an action and its effect isn’t linear, but rather is positive to some peak level, but negative beyond that, thus the graphic representation looks like an upside down letter “U”. This relationship has also been seen when it comes to autonomy³. Employees have shown a desire for autonomy – they don’t want to be limited to the boundaries of a tiny fishbowl, so should you throw them in the analogical ocean and let them find their way? Research I’ve conducted⁴ has noted that employees (especially entry-level professional employees) desire defined tasks and roles in the workplace.

Reconciling a desire for autonomy, participation and control for their work with the “too much of a good thing” effect means we need to find an alternative that meets a balance between the fishbowl and the ocean. That alternative is the aquarium. Give your employees room to swim, but enough guidelines and framework for their work that they don’t get lost in the ocean. Given them autonomy and direction.

Manage, don’t micromanage, and get your employees in an aquarium.

This has been my second blog entry in what is planned to be a weekly business blogging habit. Please feel free to share, comment and/or suggest topics.

---

[1] See, for example:

·         Hespe, G. (1976) The demand for participation among employees. Human Relations, 29(5), 411-428

·         Spector, P. E. (1986) Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work. Human Relations, 39(11), 1005-1016

·         Jønsson, T., & Jeppesen, H. J. (2013) Under the influence of the team? An investigation of the relationships between team autonomy, individual autonomy and social influence within teams. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(1), 78-93

[2] See, for example:

·         Grant, A. M., & Schwartz, B. (2011) Too much of a good thing: The challenge and opportunity of the inverted U. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 61-76

·         Pierce, J. R., & Aguinis, H. (2013) The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management. Journal of Management, 39(2), 313-338.

[3] See, for example:

·         Langfred, C. W. (2004) Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 385-399.

[4] See, for example:

·         Edelson, S. A., Haynie, J. M., & McKelvie, A. (2012).  Working for a Start-up? Investigating the role of 'Venture Personality' in the Recruitment of Human Capital. in Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 2011. A.Zacharakis, S. Alvarez, M. S. Cardon, J. O. De Castro, F. Delmar (eds.). Babson Park, MA:  The Arthur M. Blank Center for Entrepreneurship.