Middle Management’s Identity Crisis: Supervisor or Coach?

It seems times are a-changin' for those in middle management. Gone is the whip cracking villain that enforces the orders from the higher ups no matter the cost or has an employee quaking in their chair when called into the supervisor’s office...or so new studies indicate. Today’s emphasis is on collaboration; motivational inspired performance rather than the micromanager of latter years. 

Middle management roles are experiencing a resurgence from the 1980’s and 1990’s when businesses faced increasing competition and were pressured to increase efficiency. Many businesses “restructured” and that cost a lot of middle managers their jobs. But over the last 10 years, management roles have increased by 18%. 

According to Letian Zhang in his study published in The American Journal of Sociology, “The Changing Role of Managers”, this surge can be attributed to the changing role of managers.  As tasks become more complex, especially in innovation-based industries, a new philosophy has emerged emphasizing collaboration rather than supervision and increased worker autonomy. However, this new philosophy has increased the need for synchronization across departments and employees which has facilitated the growth of middle managers; not as supervisors but as copartners in accomplishing a task or meeting a goal. 

There are now technological advances that can track employee performance, decreasing the need for direct supervision, but those advances don’t impact the need for managers possessing the ability to innovate and motivate employees. 

Some things haven’t changed. The role of middle managers can be challenging. Not only are they given ownership of a problem, but they’re also expected to solve that problem by directing work and performing work. They’re often involved in conflicts between senior executives and employees. Middle managers must meet the expectations of senior management while also ensuring the well-being of the people they’re managing. They’re responsible for maintaining rapport while still keeping a professional distance. They have no influence upon decisions by upper-level management but are expected to implement those decisions regardless of whether they agree or disagree.  

Often middle managers feel disempowered; that their role is to implement rather than provide experience. They can also feel that expectations are unrealistic and that they are facing goals with no resources or support to meet those goals. If it sounds tough, it probably is. 

The upper-level echelons of a business can certainly make it easier to be a successful middle manager by presenting clear, concise, and realistic expectations. They also need to listen to their managers' input and suggestions and recognize their contributions. Middle management needs the freedom to make decisions as their input is based upon direct knowledge of how the work is implemented. Upper management needs to establish a rapport and respect the opinions and suggestions of middle management. They also should be ready to supply support when their managers are faced with difficult decisions. 

Both senior and middle managers need to be aware of and adaptive to these changing roles. Middle management is a crucial part of business and needs to be recognized as such. Only then can the identity crisis become obsolete.