If you have a strategic role do staff understand what you do all day?

[PricklyFoot]

I've just resigned my post. There are two people who work ineadiately below me. Both have a lot of technical knowledge and do a great job at getting the "work" done, but they're quite rigid thinkers and don't view the bigger picture ever (their roles don't require it TBF). They just get their heads down and do their tasks, which is great in their positions.

Anyway, on hearing my news, one of them has suggested that if each of them takes on "a bit extra" the employer won't need to replace me (cheers!).

To me (and my boss) this just illustrates that they have no idea what it is that I do. The bit extra that they think is my job is a tiny part of what I do. Most of my time is spent working with internal and external stakeholders, not completeing tasks as such.

Have I really communicated so badly or is it usual for staff not to fully understand how leaders spend their time?

I have no idea what the 'strategic thinkers' do to be honest except go to lots of meetings! 🤷‍♀️

Mine do not have a clue. I've started to get them to do some shadowing as I am bone tired of the "I'm still not quite sure what you do" head tilt.

Yes I think this is unusual for staff not to know the bigger picture. It sounds like you had communication problems anyway from the way you describe them and to be honest it sounds like you think completing tasks is beneath you. This actually happened to me once though. A colleague and I managed 2 separate teams, our manager left and we took on her role between us (for a bit extra money).

I get it, I have a co-worker who works "below me" (in pay grade, I hate saying below me because they are absolutely equal) who makes comments. She thinks "managers" don't do this, that and the other, but doesn't really have much of an idea of what we do or the responsibility on our shoulders. Yes, she's working hard, but in a different way, like you say, OP. It's really hard to explain.

I think lots of people don't understand strategy. My own manager writes "strategic" plans that are operational plans. We have an organisational strategy that frequently is cited as something people don't understand in staff surveys!!

Why don’t you write out a list of tasks you complete to give them a comprehensive idea of what you do? If they don’t understand, it’s not unreasonable for you to provide an explanation.

Becuase the job isn't task orientated. There is a comprehensive job description, which they could see if they are interested and which will be part of the application pack, but it's much more about what's to be achieved than what's to be done.

E.g. build relationships with stakeholders isn't something you tick off a to do list.

In my experience this tends to be a problem in smaller teams with very differing skill bases. In larger, more diverse, teams, people seem to have a better grasp of what others do even if those aren't their own skills. Or maybe that's just the teams that I manage 🤔

Although this did remind me of what was literally a death bed conversation with my father, who told me that he'd always been proud of what I did for a living and told everyone that his daughter was a social worker. To be clear, I have never been a social worker, never told him I was a social worker, and he absolutely never grasped ( or listened to) anything I said about my work!

You could quantify it eg you build relationships with stakeholders B with:

-weekly meetings with X, then separate weekly catch ups with Y and Z
-monthly visits to A at B location
-sending daily updates to C etc

But if there’s a job description floating around, I’d just refer them to that

I think it would be unusual not to understand your managers role. Do they not deputise for you, write papers feeding in to your presentations etc?
I'd fully encourage my direct reports to understand my role in order to succession plan etc.

@PricklyFoot It’s called the iceberg, only a small proportion of what you do is visible. It can be a real shock to some people how much work is involved at the next level up.

It’s the language: strategic, stakeholders, leaders. It all just sounds like corporate bullshit.

I am "very senior" in a strategic mostly thinking job. I regularly explain what I do day to day to my staff.

Of those I manage directly, the more switched on ones understand mostly what I do - I often describe it in simple terms as setting the direction, taking the fall if necessary and making sure they have the tools and the space so they can get on with their work without having to deal with senior staff too much.

The less switched on ones haven't a clue what this means and seem to think I do nothing all day. And so my job expands to protecting my seniors from having to deal with their pettiness!

Some people just won't get it no matter what you say to them.

I’ve had managers where I didn’t know what they did a lot of the time. And if I’m honest, they were also the worst managers I’ve worked with. Maybe that’s coincidence! But I think it’s better for everyone if your staff understand how their work feeds into yours, and also surely you should be developing them and helping them understand the bigger picture.

Have I really communicated so badly or is it usual for staff not to fully understand how leaders spend their time?

I think it is the former. Because I still don't understand what is it you do. You can be more specific when you say.

For example "build relationships with stakeholders" is too wholly and corporate speak.

This sounds more human: "I build relationships with [ who ] by [ doing what ] in order to achieve [ what ]. This supports the team by [ ]"

Surely you have some tasks such as gathering information and analysing statistics, presenting figures, creating power points, preparing reports, answering queries from stakeholders. Or is that all beneath you?

I see it in my workplace, the 'thinkers' don't really respect the 'doers' and vice-versa. I'm a bit of both and don't feel I get respected by anyone, but I enjoy the variety and having fingers in pies so to speak.

Yep, I get what you are doing. Is that 'strategic' or just 'managerial'?

When my team was directly public facing, I always thought the difference between my role compared to theirs, was: the public would notice immediately if they stopped working, it would take months (at least) to notice I wasnt. On the other hand, the public would see an improvement in service within days of them returning to work but it could be years before my return to work would result in a return to "normal service".

and, to me, it wasn't a question of whether strategic management was better than operational, the two absolutely had to go hand in hand.

Working in a similar role, some of it is always invisible until people are in the role, or until you leave and they suddenly realise that certain things have stopped happening.

However, if you haven't shown your direct reports the value of what you do, then you need to look long and hard at what you are doing. It's easy in strategic jobs to get buffeted around between meetings, until you aren't clearly associated with any successes, maybe because you've never actually achieved them, or maybe because you're not getting credit for them. Either way is not good, especially if 'stakeholder management' is a big part of your job. That stuff is meant to work down as well as up.

I'd suggest some quick reflection, and an action plan including a few ways to ensure they notice your absence with a positive sort of wistfulness...

Do you have stakeholders who don't support the project / policy?

Tbh if they think that then yes they probably don't understand which means you're either very good at your job as in nothing gets in the way of them getting on with it, or maybe not so great if what you do isn't tangible at all. Just because you're "strategic", it doesn't mean there shouldn't be any tangible outcomes (or maybe you've just never communicated it)

You were 'working with internal and external stakeholders'. To achieve what?

I'm very task oriented, my manager is almost pure strategy. I understand and respect what he does because he gives regular team updates on what his work is aiming for, and what it has achieved. It's not just intangible schmoozing.

My job is partially operational and partially strategic. It is a lot easier to explain the operational task based work. This has given me a lot to think about in terms of strategic communication.

Normal, they only see the bits that affect them directly. I would be tempted to take their offer if I were your employer. See how much they like it LOL

It's not a well functioning team when (from the sound of it) there's no respect in any direction.

Surely part of your role was building a good relationship with those in your team?