Who'S Got The Monkey??

MONKEY? WHAT MONKEY?
I DON’T HAVE A MONKEY. DO I?

by Kim Small & Riddick Smiley

“Hello! Let me introduce myself. I am your newest monkey – myname is Upper anagement Project C. You assigned me to a member of your team last week. You outlined your expectations, detailed the project guidelines, and sent the employee on their way with me in tow. Soon, the employee had a question aboute, which you answered and I remained in your subordinate’scare. The next question about me, however, required a more involved explanation and my assigned keeper did not quite get the picture you were trying to paint. “Let me think about it,” you said, and the employee left your office. I, however, stayed with you!Your employee just successfully transferred me, UpperManagement Project C, from their back onto yours. Now, it is your responsibility to feed and care for me. By the way, you seem to have a lot of monkeys in here; how are you going to care for us all?”

Too often would-be managers end up taking back responsibilityfor their subordinate’s projects. This “monkey model” of management is discussed in the classic Harvard Business Review article, “Who’s Got the Monkey?” by William Onkcen, Jr. andDonald L. Wass . In this model, delegated projects are symbolizedby monkeys that need to be cared for and fed (representing the development and management tasks associated with thedelegated projects). Like monkeys, the tasks are on the backs of some person who has the responsibility for managing it (providingcare and feeding to the monkey). As the scenario above depicts,these monkeys often wind up on the back of managers, rather than with the subordinates to whom they are assigned.


Essentially, the monkey problem is one of initiative, the state of being responsible for taking the next step forward. Both managersand subordinates allow the initiative to rest on the manager far too often. Indeed, the “monkey model” argues that initiative for adelegated project should never remain with the manager! The manager will need all her discretionary time to develop and manage her own ideas (and to maintain the initiative on projects delegated to her from above). The entire point of delegation, ofcourse, is to place the responsibility for tasks on other personnel– so that more can be accomplished than the manager canaccomplish alone. If delegation does not fully occur, this goal is not achieved. Whenever the initiative returns to the manager, “wheelspinning and bottlenecking are on their way.”

Some of the problems that arise from all the monkeys living in the manager’s office (when the next step on every project becomes the manager’s responsibility) are readily apparent. Clearly, a manager can rapidly reach overload and become only minimally productive. When this happens, no subordinate can act without input from the manager, but the manager has no time toprovide this minimal input because she is doing the work assigned to her by her own boss. For managers who are unable to handle the monkey problem, putative “subordinates” are in reality “supervisors” passing along work for the manager to handle. Less clear, but equally problematic, is the effect on the subordinates themselves – who are unable to make progress on their projects because they are rarely given the initiative. They are likely to find themselves frustrated in their work and unable to develop in theircareers. Fortunately, as Onkcen and Wass outline, it is possible for both managers and subordinates to take steps to ensure that collaboration occurs appropriately without the monkey leaving the care of its proper owner – the subordinate.

The first part of the solution is the behavior of the manager. Oncken & Wass divide a manager’s work time into three categories. The first is boss-imposed time - projects that we haveto accept and process in a timely manner or suffer directconsequences. The second is system-imposed time – the peer–to-peer projects what we acquire that also require timely processinga nd carry somewhat less direct but definite consequences. The last is self-imposed time – time in which the manager canexercise discretion to supervise, delegate, organize, and create. This discretionary time, for many managers, becomes subordinate-imposed time – a category that really should notexist at all. The key to minimizing this problem lies in insisting thatsubordinates retain the initiative on their projects – that they takecare of their own monkeys. A manager intent on this goal must first get the monkeys out of her office in order to reconvert hers ubordinate-imposed time into self-imposed time. The manager in Oncken and Wass’ example accomplished this by meeting with each subordinate and working with them to determine how thenext move might conceivably be the subordinate’s – even if that next move is merely to consider the question overnight andreturn with a substantive answer (monkeys, it appears, sleep justas well on the back of the subordinate as they do on the back ofthe manager). In any case, the monkey leaves the meeting with the subordinate – who now has been given the initiative to work on the issue.

Having returned all the monkeys to the care of their proper owners, the manager must now ensure that his subordinates understand that they are responsible for retaining the initiative(for keeping the monkey on their own backs). This involves training and developing the subordinates – but doing so as part of a deliberate process that the manager chooses to do with his new found self-imposed time. This might be hought of as teaching people the care of feeding of monkeys – but more on that in a moment.

Subordinates have an important role to play in maintaining their own initiative – one they can perform even without the active participation of their manager. That role, of course, is to keep theirmonkeys on their own backs by recognizing and avoiding situationsin which the initiative for an issue jumps to their manager. A common practice - although perhaps not common enough - is for a subordinate to present the manager with solutions and alternative sat the same time the problem is presented. This allows for adiscussion of the merits of the proposals and for the subordinate to leave with the responsibility of either implementing a solution ordeveloping additional alternatives. It also minimizes the chance that the manager will need to “get back” to the subordinate with further guidance – which passes the initiative to the manager.

The authors also list 5 rules for managers to adhere to in the care and feeding of monkeys:
1. All monkeys are either fed or shot. Do not push issues into the “deal with later” pile because they will eat up enormous amounts of your discretionary time.
2. Only spend 15 minutes at any one feeding. Whatever the issue is it can usually be dealt with quickly. That doesn’t meanthere won’t be follow up required but tackle the monkey insmall pieces.
3. Feed the monkeys by appointment only. You set the schedule,not your monkey!
4. Insist on face to face or phone discussion when feeding themonkey. If you try to feed your monkey via email, it will fallback on your lap almost immediately because you will haveto respond to the email.
5. Schedule the next feeding and list out the degree ofexpectation (recommend for approval, act and advise, routinely report, etc.) at that feeding.

If a manager can get control of these five steps to monkey management, she will have successfully restored the initiative fordelegated projects to the appropriate personnel. Going forward, it will take much less time to check in on the health of each monkey in her subordinates’ care than it would to feed and nurture them
herself. She can then use the extra time to exercise the vision and talents that earned her the management position in the first place.