All they teach you in Harvard Business School Management Essentials
Over the past two months, I had a transformative experience of re-learning management through my first online Harvard Business School (HBS) class. I gained insights into effective leadership and organizational dynamics. In this blog, I am thrilled to capture my key learnings and share my takeaways with you!
Personal Goals
I enrolled in this class to achieve several goals:
Thanks for reading Early Career Women in Tech! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Develop my definition of management
Acquire the necessary toolkit to excel as a manager.
Explore my readiness for assuming a managerial position.
Identify which of my past experiences qualify as managerial.
Improve my ability to answer management-related interview questions.
What is management?
In the class, we defined three components of management:
Coordination: Facilitating effective collaboration among team members.
Action: Ensuring timely completion of tasks.
Performance: Overseeing work to meet essential objectives such as quality, cost, and deadlines.
We defined the manager’s role as “getting things done.” A manager does their job by working with—and through—other people, such as managing external and internal processes, and getting everyone through each day and quarter.
One of the instructors noted: “Formal authority is a limited source of power! Today’s manager is closer to a coach or a teacher than to a foreman or a dictator.”
Hence, my definition of management encapsulates this perspective:
"Management entails coaching a team to effectively contribute value to the company."
Manager Lingo to get familiar with
Leading vs Managing
Psychological Safety
Normalization of Deviance
Hindsight Bias
Sunk Cost Fallacy
Process
Decision-Making Process
Effective & Affective Conflict
Consensus Method
Devil’s Advocacy
Dialectical Inquiry
Organizational Learning
Normalization of Deviance & Psychological Safety
Among these cases, the one that resonated with me the most was the tragic 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster, which claimed the lives of all seven astronauts during reentry into the atmosphere.
A notable exercise in the course involved drafting an email to express concerns to management regarding the mishandling of requests for investigating the foam strike incident, which ultimately led to the catastrophe.
Here is the email that I wish I could write:
Subject: Urgent Concerns: Risks to Astronauts' Lives and Organizational Reputation
Dear Management,
I write to bring attention to a critical matter that poses a serious risk of complete destruction of the Columbia shuttle upon reentry, stemming from the significant size of the foam strike. NASA's current course of inaction jeopardizes the lives of the seven courageous astronauts onboard and undermines the organization's hard-earned reputation.
A number of engineers possessing relevant expertise share deep concerns, yet their apprehensions have been systematically dismissed by management. Disturbingly, the most recent cancellation of the request for additional images of the foam strike demonstrates a refusal to address these concerns adequately. I implore NASA to act in the best interest of the crew members by promptly reconsidering this decision. The value of human lives must always supersede any perceived cost or inconvenience associated with such a request.
We must recognize our obligation to those onboard the shuttle and launch thorough investigations into any situations we do not fully comprehend, such as the impact of air strikes in this case. Moreover, fostering a culture of psychological safety within our teams is paramount. Engineers must be empowered to freely express their opinions without fear of reprisal or being silenced by upper management.
Time is of the essence, and the gravity of the situation demands immediate attention and action. I implore you to reevaluate the current approach and prioritize the safety and well-being of our astronauts above all else.
Sincerely,
Two key takeaways:
The ease with which upper management can perpetuate their agenda, often disregarding concerns and gradually accepting more risks. This phenomenon is called the normalization of deviance. It often starts with small violations of established rules, regulations, or safety procedures. Over time, as these deviations do not immediately result in negative consequences, they become more prevalent and accepted within the organization. This normalization can lead to a shift in the perceived level of risk and undermine safety and operational standards.
The absence of psychological safety permeating the entire organization resulted in inertia, ultimately leading to the devastating loss of the seven astronauts' lives.
In critical situations like this, effective management can make all the difference between life and death and, more commonly, between success and failure. NASA should have implemented the following measures:
Treat all incidents seriously, recognize that “normalization of deviance is happening,” and launch thorough investigations to understand any unresolved matters, such as the occurrence of foam strikes in this case. In the tech world, these investigations are called post mortems, and they are both extensive and blameless. We are all trying to learn as a team and from each other to avoid similar disasters in the future.
Foster psychological safety within teams, which encourages engineers to freely voice their opinions without fear of retribution or suppression from upper management.
By adopting these practices, organizations can better safeguard the lives of their personnel and enhance their chances of success.
Establishing Psychological Safety: Fostering an Inclusive Team Environment
The concept of psychological safety holds significant importance when it comes to nurturing a thriving team dynamic. I have always intuitively known how important it is but also I have often seen it being completely disregarded. Early in my career I was more in an “observer mode” so I did not think too much about it but now I do. Two of my must-ask interview questions are:
How does the team ensure psychological safety?
How often does the team meet socially?
To cultivate an environment where individuals feel safe to contribute their ideas and opinions, we can implement these practices: .
Embrace vulnerability as a manager: By openly acknowledging your fallibility as both a manager and a human being, you can effectively reduce perceived status differences within the team. Just say “I am sorry” or” I don’t know” or “I was wrong”. This act of vulnerability sets an example for others, encouraging them to do the same. Creating a safe space for individuals to share their thoughts and perspectives becomes a natural outcome of this collective admission.
Value and encourage diverse perspectives: Ensure that every team member understands the significance of their ideas and opinions, even if their suggestions are not ultimately implemented. To engage individuals and foster participation, pose open-ended questions that invite thoughtful contributions. Additionally, make a conscious effort to involve more junior team members who may be less inclined to speak up. This inclusion helps to diversify perspectives and enriches the overall conversation.
Foster connections through informal interactions: When feasible, arrange informal gatherings for the team to get to know one another on a personal level before important decisions must be made. This casual setting provides an opportunity for individuals to build rapport, establish common ground, and develop a sense of camaraderie. If formal meetings allow limited time for such interactions, dedicate the initial ten minutes to allow individuals to connect and familiarize themselves with their colleagues.
By implementing these practices, teams can create an environment characterized by psychological safety, where every team member feels empowered to contribute their unique insights and perspectives. Such an inclusive atmosphere nurtures collaboration, boosts creativity, and ultimately leads to more effective decision-making.
Managerial Pitfalls
In addition to Normalization of Deviance which I wrote about above, there were several other managerial pitfalls we discussed in the class:
Hindsight Bias: If you’ve ever said to yourself, “I knew I shouldn’t have made that hire. I had mixed feelings about him all along,” you’ve fallen victim to what psychologists call “hindsight bias.” That’s our tendency to look back and see the outcome of an event as having been predictable at the time. In reality, there was no way you could have “known” the candidate would not work out, but in retrospect, you only remember the red flags and discount the reasons you had for hiring him.
Sunk Costs: Research in behavioral economics and other fields has found that individuals, teams, and companies often do include sunk costs in their calculations. Why? Because we just can’t bear to “give up” all of the time, money, effort, and resources we’ve already put into something. So we stick it out.
Processes
In the dynamic business world, processes play a pivotal role in shaping the success of organizations, regardless of their size. Surprisingly, despite my eight years of experience in medium and large companies, it wasn't until recently that I truly appreciated the significance of processes. The course shed light on their fundamental role, challenging the common misconception that engineers often hold – viewing processes as unnecessary hurdles.
Let's explore them a bit more:
A process involves multiple stages of tasks and activities.
They all transform inputs (information, resources, small company, etc.) into outputs (budgets, messages, larger company).
Some key processes include:
Decision-making: the process of identifying problems or opportunities and choosing from among various courses of action
Implementation: the process of executing strategies, plans, and other choices effectively and efficiently
Organizational learning: the process of acquiring, interpreting, and applying new information and ideas to be able to perform effectively, make improvements, or innovate
Change management: the process of guiding or leading an organization through internal or external transitions or shifts
What’s not a process? Anything that involves only a single task or activity that does not produce a tangible output, for example, reading a company report but not applying what it says to your job.
Decision Making
A good decision-making process encompasses several crucial elements that lay the foundation for successful outcomes.
Quality. It involves careful, rigorous analysis of the problem and a thoughtful comparison of the options.
Executability. It creates collective buy-in and increases the odds that the decision will be executed well.
Timeliness. It is neither too early nor too late.
Within the realm of decision-making, we explored three notable processes that offer distinct approaches and outcomes.
Consensus: This method is familiar and widely employed in many organizations. It simplifies decision-making by relying on unanimous agreement among participants. Although often implicit and unstated, consensus decision-making streamlines implementation as everyone involved is in agreement.
Devil's Advocacy: This intriguing approach involves one party advocating for a specific solution while another party critically highlights the potential flaws and drawbacks associated with that solution. Although it may introduce conflict, when executed properly, Devil's Advocacy can foster constructive debate and lead to more robust decisions.
Dialectical Inquiry: Similar to Devil's Advocacy, this method involves one party presenting a proposal while the second party collaboratively seeks to improve and refine that proposal. Dialectical Inquiry encourages a collaborative and iterative process where ideas are enhanced through constructive dialogue.
Key Takeaways:
Firstly, making the right decision often necessitates exploring multiple options in depth, continuously evaluating their viability, and persevering until the best solution emerges or becomes apparent.
Secondly, a clear breakdown of three components —Proposal, Supporting Facts, and Assumptions—can significantly enhance the decision-making process. Applying this breakdown proved immensely beneficial when my husband and I were evaluating different options for purchasing a new house. It provided clarity and allowed us to make an informed and satisfying choice.
Managing Conflict in Decision-Making:
Distinguishing between effective and affective conflict is crucial. Effective conflict revolves around task-related discussions and can stimulate creativity and critical thinking. On the other hand, affective conflict stems from personal or emotional issues and can be detrimental to the decision-making process. By recognizing and addressing conflict appropriately, we can foster a productive environment that facilitates robust
Example phrase if you notice a discussion is getting full of affective conflict: it is hard for me to hear this point of view, help me understand it better.
Implementation
I found the implementation component to be the most straightforward since many of my contributions as an individual contributor align with this domain. Among the case studies discussed in this module, the implementation of the Affordable Care Act stands out. On March 23, 2010, President Obama mandated the launch of HealthCare.gov by the United States Department of Health and Human Services on October 1, 2013 (source). Disastrously, on the first day, only six users successfully completed and submitted their applications, selecting a health insurance plan. Obama launched a significant endeavor to modernize the government technology expertise which led to the establishment of the U.S. Digital Service (USDS), which has an impressive playbook accessible on their website. The playbook offers guidance on effective project management and successful execution. You can explore their comprehensive playbook at
https://playbook.cio.gov/, providing insights on how to navigate and accomplish complex initiatives.
Additionally, retrospectives are a vital component of successful implementations and we should conduct them regularly. Embrace the opportunity to reflect and learn from each experience. To facilitate meaningful discussions during retrospectives, consider posing the following guiding questions:
What was our original goal or intention?
What unfolded in reality?
Why did the outcome transpire as it did?
How can we enhance our approach in future endeavors? Specifically:
What practices or actions should we sustain or continue doing?
What areas can we improve or change?
Organizational Learning
Recognizing the importance of organizational learning, I have started incorporating questions about it into my interviews when assessing potential companies. I ask these questions during interviews to understand an organization's approach to learning and feedback:
How does the company prioritize and encourage continuous learning within the team?
What initiatives or resources are provided to create time for learning?
How does the company foster a culture of learning from peers and external sources?
What mechanisms are in place to promote knowledge-sharing and cross-team collaboration?
How does the manager proactively create an environment conducive to giving and receiving feedback?
What measures does the manager take to facilitate a feedback-rich culture within their team?
This knowledge helps inform your decision-making process and ensures alignment with a company that values continuous improvement and embraces a culture of learning.
Change Management
We have probably all been there: layoffs, acquisitions, adopting a new technology. Change in companies is inevitable and it is often handled poorly. A good leader has to acknowledge it and make sure to follow a good process to make it smooth and successful.
We discussed the three stages of managing change "unfreeze-change-refreeze" which provide a framework for understanding and effectively implementing organizational change:
Unfreeze - In this initial stage, the focus is on creating a readiness for change within the organization. It involves acknowledging the need for change, breaking down resistance to change, and establishing a sense of urgency.
Change - This stage involves implementing the actual change and transitioning from the old ways of doing things to the new desired state. It requires careful planning, effective communication, and active involvement of employees.
Refreeze - The final stage focuses on reinforcing and stabilizing the changes that have been implemented. It involves embedding the new processes, systems, and behaviors into the organization's culture to ensure sustainability.
By following this three-stage model, organizations can navigate the complexities of change more effectively, manage resistance, and increase the chances of successful and lasting change implementation.
Conclusion
This class knocked it out of the park, I achieved most of my goals after taking it.
[Done] Develop my definition of management
[Ongoing] Acquire the necessary toolkit to excel as a manager.
[Ongoing] Explore my readiness for assuming a managerial position.
[Done] Identify which of my past experiences qualify as managerial.
[Ongoing] Improve my ability to answer management-related interview questions.
What is next?
Read the book Manager’s Path
Interview as an Engineering Manager
Sign up for another HBS class
