This is a little harder decision than choosing a frozen yogurt flavor and it involves looking backward a little so we can look forward. Look back at the current structure of the organization, the people available, the marketplace and much more. After all, our decisions about our employees can make or break the financial success of the company. Bad decisions about employees can irreparably affect morale in the office—whether it is because you are keeping someone on board who shouldn't be there or letting someone go when it's not obvious to the rest of the staff as to why. Loss of morale can be almost impossible to regain.

Related: Read the Harrington's previous column ”Kindness As Leadership”.

Because it's so important, we should start at the top of the funnel, or, to borrow a phrase, “look from 30,000 feet.” If you are setting expectation for a particular position in the office, you first have to look at how the positions intertwine. Presumably, you have carefully examined the job descriptions in the firm, and this provides guidance for measuring employee value. However, if you are using the same old tired job description from more than 5 years ago, it's time for a careful update.

Is your organization still structured the way it was 5 years ago? Should it be? Have technological improvements resulted in shifting and rearranging job duties? If so, the job descriptions need to be updated, and so should the organizational chart. The org chart takes us up to 30,000 feet.

There are plenty of good guidelines out there about setting up the org chart. One concept that seems to work is to look at it first as the customer, then as the lowest-rung employee. This works because we can then see the flow with fresh eyes. An alternate perspective can reveal things we may not otherwise have seen. Does your organizational flow make sense from the bottom up?

Workflow can be reviewed from these two perspectives as well. How does work move through the agency? How long since you have checked that? Basic flow charts may show you areas of efficiency that can be improved.

Once you are sure the work flow and structures are optimal, you can move on to the more human issue: Do you have the talent in the building now to work that flow, or do you need to add some fresh talent? Can you rearrange job duties within the list of employees you already have? Is there anyone who is underused?

Related: Read the Harrington's “Juggling Agency Income, Outgo And Upkeep”.

If you don't know the talents of your folks quite that well, consider the idea of a profile; maybe ZeroRisk or Omnia or something like that. While no profile is perfect, it'll give you an idea of what your folks naturally can do. Remember, if you tap natural talents, the result is always better. People like to do what they do well, and the effect is cumulative. The more successful they are, the better they will perform for you.

The blend of staff talent and the workflow that is required to provide your product to your customer is the magic that you have to work as a manager. How do you balance the two while juggling budgets, organic growth and turnover? Part of the answer is by not trying to do everything on your own.

For example, you shouldn't try to write the procedures manual yourself. The folks doing the job know it better than anyone, so let them produce that particular documentation. You can allow this to be a general step-by-step guide, or ask for particular detail for the data management systems you use. But always start with the folks who do the job every day and edit from there.

Explaining what you want

Articulation of the expectations is an entirely different set of issues. Everything isn't in a job description. You may have expectations as to style or approach which have nothing to do with the results documented in the job description or even the procedures manual. For example, do you want to know every detail of the research within a certain project, so that no one makes a move without your knowledge (I hope not; micromanagement is its own curse)? Or maybe you just want to build the outer limitations for your group and let them run on their own. Be careful not to get too loose with this, either. You're still going to want effectiveness. My favorite saying as a manager is that I'll give you all the rope you need to hang yourself—but I'll never let the trap door open under you.

While we have information all around us, literally available now at our fingertips in our smartphones, we still struggle as a species to actually communicate well. This is where the issue of expectations most commonly goes awry. The recipe for disaster is a simple one: “I don't know what I want to begin with, and even if I did, I don't know how to express it!”

Related: Read the article “Smart Agency Processes” by Philip Lieberman.

It's so much easier to say what we don't want. This is especially true after the fact. Once we're looking at the result, we can more easily see if it met our unspoken, sometimes unknown, expectations. It's like buying a new suit without trying it on. But it's really not fair to our employees to judge them this way, is it? After all, we can return the suit, but the employees can't get that time back. It is incumbent upon us to communicate the requirements clearly in the beginning. And, to keep saying it in different ways, adjusting as needed, until it is fully understood.

If you are having trouble, why not try out a few ideas on a small group of employees? Get a representative group of folks in a room together for lunch and just talk about some of the things that need work. Tackle only one or two things at a time. Ask lots of questions. Learn by listening to their ideas and thoughts. Take lots of notes. Then see if you can blend their ideas with your vision. You'll be pleasantly surprised at the results.