The Problem of "Assumptions" in Managers and Executives

In logic an assumption is a proposition that is taken for granted, as if it were true based upon presupposition without preponderance of the facts. (Wikipedia)


Many problems in work and life are due to the problem of assumption. I work in a technology field and a common one encountered is based on a a twist on "out of sight, out of mind" in that if people do not see or hear from us then we are not doing anything. In most IT-related activities success can be measured by the lack of problems. While staff -- who may only contact IT staff when there is a problem --  are quite content to not have to interact with IT staff. However, upper management has a tendency to view the IT department otherwise. At least that is what I have observed in cases of poor managers.


In my career I have worked in organizations with either low or high manager turnover. Each has its own set of positives and negatives (pros and cons).

• Low management turnover - pros
• historical knowledge and perspective
• sense of stability
• Low management turnover - cons
• can be slow to change
• High management turnover - pros
• change is introduced by turnover
• High management turnover - cons
• lack of historical knowledge and perspective
• tendency to prefer the new and discount the old
• tendency to assume

I currently work in a field with high management turnover and here are some of my observations of good executives/managers whose actions produce strong positive results.

• When first coming into an organization they hold their assumptions in check by first going around and making their own observations. 
• Regularly follow-up with observations. This can be done in staff meetings or less formally by walking around and talking to staff.
• If they don't know they ask rather than assume. 
• Even if they think they know but an issue is either escalating or of great concern they check to verify their knowledge. Things change. The longer you are with an organization the more comfortable you are with your base of knowledge but even if something else has not changed (and it probably has) the executive's/manager's depth of understanding has changed.
• Verify both the best and the worst at all times.
• Don't discount history.
• Be flexible.

One of the best managers I ever worked for said that he was not trained as a manager so he was working from the belief that his job as a manager (executive) was "to provide departments and staff with the resources they need to get the job done, reduce barriers for them to do their job including staying out of their way but being available when needed". In following that belief he led the department from a neglected but functional state to a highly functional state and leader model for the whole organization. 

I left the organization not long after he left because the incoming management came in (from the outside) with assumptions that everything the organization was doing was wrong. Yes, there were problems in other departments but they did not look to see what was working and what was not. Sadly, this a common mistake.

I still hear back from former co-workers and while their department has not yet been able to reclaim their former highly functional state they have -- despite a series of poor executive management -- some of the remaining staff have been able to personally retain many of the values of that time. As a result they are often considered some of the most valued employees. Those who set aside those values to accommodate the change in (poor) management may have have risen or fallen in rank but are not trusted or valued.

Recommended reading: 8 Things We Hate About IT: How to Move Beyond the Frustrations to Form a New Partnership with IT by Susan Cramm