Leadership determines productivity and morale. The wrong style can set a company into a tailspin of dissent that could have serious consequences for your staff retention rate. If your leadership style doesn’t match the company culture or situation, chances are you won’t be successful at managing your people.
The majority of management styles in modern business are about a shared environment where all employees have an equal say and decisions are made as a group. This is called the “bottom-up” method and it typically works best with the Millennial workforce. However, there is a leader for a reason and there are times when they may have to step in and lead. It is crucial to grab control when necessary, but what really makes a great leader is knowing when and why.
What is Top Down Approach?
The industrial revolution birthed the leadership style known as the “top down approach” when an authoritative method was used for unskilled workers. It is considered the traditional style of management and the strategy calls for all key decisions to be made by senior organizational leaders.
In the top down approach, the project manager is responsible for the work breakdown structure [WBS] and project plan, which they complete alone. After the plan is approved, tasks are then delegated to team members with the appropriate deadlines.
Although the top-down approach is still a useful and popular method, modern employees are finding it more and more demoralizing when done wrong. A successful leader knows how to facilitate this method while also keeping their team engaged. They also know when to switch to the top-down approach when necessary to do their job efficiently. There are always certain instances where the traditional method will prevail.
When the Top Down Approach Works
The idea is to manage in a way that people appreciate, with clarity, intent and respect. The moment upper management becomes erratic, everything falls apart at the seams. So, what is top down approach in modern management? It’s certainly not about being bossy. There are a few key scenarios in which leaders will always come out on top if they use this approach:
Increase your business agility with Clarizen’s project management software
Unresolved Conflict
If a project manager is continuously coaching and communicating with their team, the chances of conflict are slim. There isn’t time for people to bicker when a leader is thoroughly involved. However, people are only human and from time to time, unresolved conflict may occur. In this case, the top down method works best to solve the problem. When a team continues to argue amongst themselves, a strong leader needs to step in to establish standards.
High Risk
Not everything goes as planned during a project. Sometimes a call needs to be made that involves high risk. This can be anything from a costly expense to bending the rules or trying an unorthodox approach. Great leaders don’t delegate decisions that could throw their team members under the bus or harm the decision-maker. A strong leader will take the top down approach and assume the risk.
Urgency
If a decision needs to be made immediately, the project manager is the one with the highest level of expertise and thus is better positioned to assess the situation. In this instance, the top down approach works best because taking time to gather input would be counterproductive. If a breaking opportunity or challenge requires immediate decision-making, a strong leader will step in to make it happen. Additionally, if the boss is making the call on an urgent issue, they won’t be shocked or dismayed by unintended consequences.
Empowering
Sometimes, people just need someone to lead and give them confidence. The top down approach can work magic when a project manager can step in and rally their team in a positive manner. A strong leader knows when their team is demoralized or needs encouragement from a setback. If people are frightened or tired they look for someone to make an executive decision to empower them.
The top down approach is not about a boss lording over a factory floor, it’s about leadership applied in the proper places. It has been said that leading with an iron fist can be demoralizing to staff, but lack of leadership can cause the entire boat to go wildly off course. As long as you know when to step up and lead, and when to let your team lead you, you’ll reach a successful outcome every time.
Search online for "top-down" or "command-and-control" management and you'll find an avalanche of articles about how this approach to leadership is both antiquated and repressive:
But put aside your mental picture of a brontosaurus [you know: big tail, small brain] and consider the fact that top-down management [with a twist--I'll explain in a minute] is an extremely effective way to lead people.
Micah Harper, writing in Business Administration and Management, explains that top-down management occurs when the leader or leaders make critical decisions, which are then handed down to the next-level leaders, who are charged with implementing that directive with their teams.
The advantage of this approach, writes Harper is that "making decisions from the top allows leaders to be clear on goals and expectations. It also gives employees more time to focus on work duties instead of attending meetings discussing potential directions of the company. When a strong leader is at the forefront, managers can quickly and effectively take charge, assign tasks to teams or employees, and establish solid deadlines." Plus, top-down leadership "gives companies a drive that they might not have otherwise."
For an example of top-down leadership's effectiveness, recall that 2018 has been a brutal winter for the Northeast. [In fact, the spring hasn't been so wonderful either.] And back in early January, a vicious winter storm not only dumped a foot of snow, it also caused chaos at New York City's Kennedy International Airport. In-bound planes were stranding on the tarmac. Overseas flights had to turn around or route to other airports. Travelers were separated from their luggage and had to sleep in the terminal.
But although Boston Logan International Airport faced the same weather conditions, it simply canceled flights without pain and suffering--and a day later was running normally.
The difference between the two airports, writes Patrick McGeehan in The New York Times, is how the new institutions are managed. Kennedy is run loosely, with airlines and other companies running the terminals. But Logan uses a command-and-control management approach.
Writes McGeehan, "The contrasting approach is evident at a daily gathering in a packed room tucked into one of Logan's four terminals. Every morning, dozens of airport officials meet there with representatives of airlines and a roster of state and federal agencies to share information that might affect operations: everything from the weather to runway maintenance."
At Logan, Ed Freni, the director of aviation for Massport, leads the meetings. Each of the four terminals at Logan has its own manager who reports to Freni.
"Ask anyone at the airport who's in charge, they'll say Ed Freni," said Thomas P. Glynn, the chief executive of Massport.
And Glynn adds: "Top-down management is sort of out of fashion these days." But the approach works at Logan "because people have respect for those at the top."
And there's another factor that makes Logan's management approach work--the twist that I mentioned earlier. Notice that every single day the director of aviation presides over a meeting attended by leaders representing airlines and other stakeholders to discuss what's happening. That intense, high-touch communication means that Freni is not just issuing orders--he's allowing information to be shared and leaders to engage in dialogue.
Mark Lukens writes in Fast Company that there's actually a false choice between top-down and bottom-up leadership.
"The truth is that leaders can--and probably should--have it both ways. Neither top-down nor bottom-up leadership work consistently if they're seen as absolutes. There's usually room for both within a single organization at the same time."
After all, top-down leadership is really about setting a clear direction and making sure leaders, managers and employees understand how to act on that direction.
That doesn't mean people have to march in lockstep without participating in decisions. Writes Lukens: "Set the parameters for your organization from the top-your purpose, goals, design, the sort of brand you want to be, etc. Then use those parameters to frame the bottom-up decisions."
Top-down still works because it gives an organization direction and discipline. Once you have those boundaries, you can give employees room to put their own stamp on their work. You can manage from the top, as Lukens writes, "yet at the same time let your employees decide how best to make the work happen. Tap into their ideas, and earn their commitment and engagement."