30.10.2024 | News, SAVALnews
The expert community abounds with different tensions. “However, it’s not a bad thing as long as you identify those tensions”, says Annastiina Mäki. She works as a managing consultant at Psycon, specialising in recruitment, psychological personal assessments and leadership development.
She believes that the emergence of tensions might even be viewed as desirable. It opens up opportunities for development.
“It doesn’t usually inspire very innovative outcomes if all the focus is placed on trying to achieve a well-harmonized culture, where everyone smiles, agrees and avoids conflicts”, Mäki says.
But how are tensions identified?
Mäki took an interest in management and leadership at the early stages of her career. In the tourism industry, she advanced to managerial positions quite early and learned many leadership skills first hand. These included how to gain credibility as a superior even when your core competence for the field in question were lacking.
Throughout her career, Mäki has focused on personnel development. Alongside her work, she also completed her university studies. First, a Master’s and Licentiate degree in Education from Tampere University and then a Doctorate in Philosophy from the University of Vaasa in 2017.
At Psycon, Mäki describes her work as hybrid work. She researches and develops aspects of management and leadership, for example, through the development of the management culture and practices for different change situations. She also coaches managerial personnel. The clients range from startups to listed companies, higher education institutes and the Government.
“I do a lot of work with expert organisations, primarily listed companies. Alongside that work, I spend time researching and writing about management and leadership. Thanks to the variation, no two work days are alike.”
In the spring, she published a work of nonfiction together with Kimmo Mäki as co-author. The two key concepts of the book are management interactions and work orientations, which are closely linked to one another. What do these concepts mean?
Mäki describes a management interaction as a work-related physical, emotional, or viewpoint-based interaction between superior and subordinate.
“At its best, all three of these aspects will be involved in the interaction. Management interactions are unique situations, but they form a continuum that carries the relationship in a particular direction”, she explains.
A management interaction can be a scheduled one-on-one development discussion or a spontaneous, quick encounter at a coffee machine. These interactions provide the framework for agreeing on common principles and objectives, solving problems, giving feedback and recognising success.
“At the same time, we give meaning to things and learn more about each other.”
Mäki describes a work orientation as an individual’s approach to their work. For example, does the person primarily prefer to work alone or more closely with the team? How do they feel about changes at work and how do they plan to achieve their goals?
“Work orientation is not the same as personality, although there is a connection between them. Orientation is more flexible. It is modified through the course of studies and working life. It can also be consciously influenced.”
In her doctoral dissertation, Mäki writes that leadership involves paradoxical features and conflicting expectations. Mäki points out that perhaps the most common paradox is autonomy of work versus the longing for leadership.
“When under leadership, we want enough freedom to operate, but at the same time we hope that someone will show us the way, help us resolve problems and tell us what to do next”, Mäki says.
She states that the second paradox that appears in every organisation is discussion versus clarity. On the one hand, we want to discuss, have influence and be heard, but on the other hand, we want someone to clearly tell us where we are heading.
The third paradox she outlines as the big picture versus silos. The paradox comes from the fact that even though we all want to see the big picture, the work is being done in narrow silos, often limited to units, teams or areas of expertise, especially in larger organisations.
“Paradoxes are a natural part of life in expert communities, but they create strong tensions. They can be identified by discussing different perspectives and seeking solutions”, Mäki says.
“It is also important to discuss any tensions privately between the superior and subordinate. For that discussion, it would be good to identify different types of work and management orientations. We have different orientations, which may be interpreted as personal chemistry problems.
Solutions can only be found by recognising diversity and realising they require compromise and practice.”
Once tensions have been identified, conflict resolution skills are needed. These skills include the ability to highlight different issues and perspectives, but also the ability to discuss, seek solutions and understand the views of others.
“For example, the CFO and HR director often look at the same thing from very different angles. It is important for them to understand each other’s perspective, so that any joint decisions can be based on a broad and complementary understanding.”
Expert work is often self-directed in nature. According to Mäki, autonomy in one’s own work is a typical expectation for expert work. From a management perspective, however, one challenge that may arise is that while some people prefer to work independently, others prefer to work in teams. Is it better for management to be flexible and enable freedom to those who want it, or to define uniform approaches to the work that will apply equally to everyone?
“Both, or somewhere in between. It is vital to agree on the framework with which everyone will comply. Within the general framework, each person can then be given the freedom to work in a way that ensures that their skills and contributions will be best utilised.”
Negotiations are necessary to establish this framework, whether it be relaxed or stringent.
“For example, when someone wants to work alone in a project and another wants to work together with others, it is important to find methods that take these different approaches into account. One method might be to start out working together and then agree on certain times to gather and jointly assess the outcomes along the way.”
“A certain amount of clarity is important in leadership. There should be a clearly defined framework that everyone respects, but within which a sufficient amount of leeway is permitted.”
Expert work is carried out by experts, because they have the required special expertise in a particular area. However, in terms of expert work management, Mäki views the identification of competence as one common problem. She also highlights difficulties with the identification of potential, which signifies the skills an expert may have beyond their area of core competence.
“It’s easy to think that when someone is a super expert on something, that will be their only area of responsibility now and always. However, a person may suddenly become frustrated with their work if their individual needs are not recognised in terms of future development. Constant attention to an individual’s potential is important.”
On the other hand, the spirit of the time is one of contradictions. On the one hand, there is a lot of discourse about the problem of labour market mismatch, namely that there are unemployed people in the labour market, but no qualified workers for those jobs that are open. At the same time, many people who work as experts are challenged by the broad scope of their work. You need to know a little bit about everything and manage a number of different systems, which leaves less time to fully utilise your own special skills.
Is it better to work in a diverse way or to focus on a clear area of expertise? It is Mäki’s opinion that the answer to this question can also be found between the extremes. The team needs to determine the generic things that should be managed by everyone, but also to ensure that everyone has a core area of competence that will be developed on a long-term basis.
“Many people are struggling with the need to be a generalist and know everything, while at the same time, they should also be developing their core competence. Expectations should be said out loud.”
Mäki points out that a lot of people are struggling precisely with these expectations.
“This is all closely connected with work orientations. One person might be a content expert who would prefer only to develop within their own area of substance. Another might be a community-oriented generalist who enjoys variation and working broadly, in which case the core competence is not necessarily in a single area of substance, but in the ability, for example, to establish networks or facilitate events.”
“Potential and wishes should be taken into account in order to build a productive and satisfied expert community.”
Text Jaakko Tiira. Photos Jani Laukkanen. The article has been published on ASIA membership magazine 03/2024.
Job: Management researcher and organisation developer, works as a Managing Consultant at Psycon Education: Doctor of Philosophy (Management), Licentiate of Education Age: 56 Originally from: Turku Currently lives in: Espoo Family: Spouse Kimmo (organisational researcher) and son Akseli (student of adult education) Additional information: Published books, articles and blogs on, for example, the development of management and work communities. Latest publication in the spring, Mäki & Mäki: Johtamiskohtaamisten aallokossa – tunnista työorientaation voima (Professional Publishing Finland, 2024). Publication in English: In the wave of management interactions - identify the power of a work orientation
Article: Mission:Equality Article: Do you know whether you fall within the scope of the Working Time Act? Employment related legal services at ASIA