Managerial Archetypes McKinsey Matrix Template

Description
On September 9th 2020, Aaron De Smet, Caitlin Hewes, and Leigh Weiss from Consulting firm McKinsey & Company published an article called "For smarter decisions, empower your employees", (available here: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/for-smarter-decisions-empower-your-employees ). In Exhibit 2 of this article, they present the Matrix of Managerial Archetypes to show that "providing the right level of guidance at the right time, doesn't always come naturally to managers", when wanting to empower their employees.

Coming across this matrix on McKinsey's LinkedIn page early 2021, I decided to take on the challenge to make it an easy tool for business leaders to use to categorise their managers on the "Managerial Archetypes" Matrix.

The objective of this Best Practice is to help business leaders identify the "main style" of their managers so that they can appropriately: train, coach, allocate projects, teammates and recruit managers - making sure the former are compatible with their style of management.

The Matrix has two axes:
- Style of Leadership (Controlling, Autocratic -> Inspiring, Coaching)
- Level of Involvement (Frequent -> Episodic)

The Matrix hence groups managers into 4 categories:

✅ The Helicopter Boss (Controlling, Autocratic Style of Leadership + Episodic Level of Involvement)
-> They generally tend to treat their employees like parents treat their children. Their constant "hovering" over employees, taking most decisions without being frequently involved in the projects, make their team low on autonomy and risk-taking. This usually prevents employee learning, development and growth.

Possible consequences of a Helicopter Boss:
- Low Trust in others carrying out tasks successfully
- Delegation is tough, as the Helicopter Boss tends to prefer doing things by herself/himself.
- They constantly "hover" over direct reports and ping them for updates on task accomplishments, even if the direct report has not asked for help.
- Lack of Work/life Balance
- Low Team Morale as the Helicopter Boss leaves an impression that his/her direct reports cannot be trusted
- High Team Turnover Rate
- Low Quality Work output / Low Productivity
- Successorship is tough to find in the team, as not many people want to work for a Helicopter Boss

✅ The Micromanager (Controlling, Autocratic Style of Leadership + Frequent Level of Involvement)
-> The micromanager tends to focus on daily activities for the team and for each worker. This style of management tends to have efficient short term impact but tends to on the long run lower morale and create conflicts. The key challenge for the micromanager is to improve their leadership style to take more distance to lower levels of control, bringing them step-by-step to "the coach".

✅ The Coach (Inspiring, Coaching Style of Leadership + Frequent Level of Involvement)
-> "Coaching Leadership", is a style that is highly collaborative, supportive and full of guidance for teammates. Coaches tend to focus on extrapolating the best out of their team members by being a "smart" and pertinent guide to enable them to hit their goals and overcome their challenges.

Here are a few Pros and Cons of this style of leadership:
PROS:
- Two-Way Dialogue
- Constructive Feedback Loops
- Higher potential of professional development for each teammate
- Focus is on supporting, not assessing
- Opens-up growth opportunities and creative thinking

CONS:
- Requires a lot of time and energy, so the coach does not have much time to carry on his on work
- Not the most efficient in contextes were speed is key
- Not the great fit for high-pressure or highly results-oriented organisations

✅ The Cheerleader (Inspiring, Coaching Style of Leadership + Episodic Level of Involvement)
-> They usually the kings of "Hands-Off", giving a lot of positive responsibilities to employees, and their development. They are supportive, but not really proactive when it comes to "roll up the sleeves" and work alongside workers. They are empathetic, capable of listening and transmitting high energy to teams to accomplish the missions at hand. However, their usually "broad" recommendations makes it complex to solve precise/technical issues and the fact of leaving a lot of responsibility to the teams, makes some talents want to look elsewhere for personal growth.

The Best Practice is:
- an editable Microsoft PowerPoint Template Slide
- an attached Excel Model to plot the graph
- with an online & offline 15 step-by-step methodology, with pedagogical illustrations for each step.

Should you have any questions on using this top tier HR/Leadership Template slide and framework, you're welcome to reach out to me via Private Message.

Good Luck!
Tim

⭐️ Bundle of 17 Four-Quadrant (2x2) Matrix Framework Templates (including this one):https://www.eloquens.com/tool/wJa7FKkP/strategy/management-consulting-templates-and-frameworks/four-quadrant-matrix-frameworks-template-bundle

⭐️ Bundle of 13 McKinsey & Company Models & Frameworks (including this one):
https://www.eloquens.com/tool/9GJKSgnL/strategy/mckinsey-frameworks-best-practices/mckinsey-company-models-and-frameworks-bundle

⭐️ Bundle of 20+ MBB (McKinsey, BCG, Bain) Strategy Consulting Frameworks (including this one):https://www.eloquens.com/tool/vqPVi0dJ/strategy/management-consulting-templates-and-frameworks/mbb-mckinsey-bcg-bain-models-and-frameworks-bundle