Latest posting James O’Brien asked: Which is the better manager, the one who stops and listens to you, or the one that gets results?

• RoseMarie Loft: The one that does both, depending on the priorities of the situation.

• Mara Thorne: Agreed, they’re not mutually exclusive. If your boss is approachable and listens to you and values you, you are more likely to go the extra mile for them, which means that the results are likely to follow.

• Dean Bennett: You can’t get results if you don’t stop, if you don’t listen and if you aren’t focused on getting results. It takes all three. I find it very interesting how we tend towards the dualistic thinking of either/or, (what American business consultant, author and lecturer Jim Collins refers to as “the tyranny of the Or”), rather than looking at how we can combine things in ways to get new results – in behaviours as well as other areas.

• Lorraine Hall: The one who stops and listens will empower you to achieve results.

• Wendy Cox: Both. A good manager should recognise when there is a “fire-fighting” situation and so it’s necessary to command and control. If this is regular practice, though, the manager effectively works solo, discounts anyone else’s opinions and ideas, avoids change and having to explain actions and becomes an isolated expert with no team to support their work. When that happens, the organisation should be worried.

• Andrew Greaves: By listening to others a manager benefits from the skills of others, is less likely to make mistakes and is more in touch with their workforce. However, I’ve known some great managers who probably spread themselves a little too thinly to listen to others as much as they would like. In those cases, entrusting some soft skill tasks to others – such as making time to listen – can work really well. If there’s a skilled “people person” in the senior management team, I’d suggest there’s a case for giving them a role as listening post on behalf of the organisation’s leaders.

• For more on this discussion, go to linkd.in/listenresults

Other popular discussions: Is it too hard to sack under-performing staff? linkd.in/underperform

Are eccentrics a welcome part of office life? linkd.in/crazyboss

Comments [0]

Latest posting When I stood for election as a student representative on my faculty board, a central plank in my ‘manifesto’ was that examiners’ reports should be open to all students. I had discovered that they did a report every year and their comments included helpful advice on what candidates had misunderstood. Given that the university was in the learning business, I thought this was information that would be helpful to us all, students and teachers. (The faculty board chairman deftly pre-empted what he, no doubt, knew would be an unpredictable discussion and put the reports in the library anyway: very much a ‘quick win’ for me, and a lesson learned about managing change!)

It’s with the same logic that Ofqual, the examinations regulator, requires exam boards to run feedback events. It is in everyone’s interests for the system to be open and fair, and for everyone to have the chance to learn and improve.

So, I don’t read the recent allegations in the Daily Telegraph of malpractice in the exam system as evidence of collusion by examiners in nudging up standards. Feedback is not collusion. If some individuals have gone too far, broken their contractual obligations and given hints about future exams, that’s cheating, not feedback and they should be dealt with severely. I’m confident they will be.

I declare an interest as a non-executive director of Pearson Education, which runs the Edexcel exam board. In taking up my role, I attended a number of briefing sessions in which managers explained, in detail, how the board was run, and the processes in place to ensure that our exams are managed rigorously and fairly.

I think many commentators would be amazed at the trouble taken by Edexcel – and the cost incurred in doing so – to meet standards we set ourselves which comfortably exceed those required of us by the regulator. So, far from fearing the enquiry that Michael Gove has announced, I welcome it. An honest, open, enquiry will show the doubters just how impressively things are done.Comments [1]