Proactive vs Reactive Management
Posted 11-06-2008 at 09:57 AM by veneretio
This one really has me wondering about the parallels between Business and WoW. Here's the situation:
- A problem arises
- A policy is put in place
- Order is restored
That's a very reactive management style and feels a lot like a good business environment. It's a good way to handle in a lot of ways too. Here's another situation:
- We think a problem is coming
- We discuss how to avoid the potential problem
- All the management fights -or- A Policy is put in place
- Results Unknown
That's a very proactive management style and feels a lot like the side of business I hate. It usually results in a policy that people don't understand why it even showed up and rarely seems to empathize with everyone's situation.
Is this true though?
Certainly we Proactively put in place policies for Guild recruitment, Loot distribution and other things. I guess the rule of thumb here is to be Proactive its gotta be an obvious and well established need in the industry. Similar to a business needing a vacation policy, a sick policy, etc
Overall though, I'm finding that I gradually started switching from a Reactive Management style to a Proactive Management style. Let me tell ya what... you make less friends being Proactive. It's taken me a bit of soul searching to realize that it's a bad place to be. You don't really want to be proactively managing in WoW. It hits all those bad vibes that people feel every day at their jobs and people don't want WoW to be a job. Or at the very least, they don't want to feel like it is.
So how did I get there?
I got jaded. I got burned. I fixed a lot of problems. I saw a lot of things blow up in my face. I wanted to stop the pain. I was stupid enough to believe that I could. I was stupid enough to believe that a drama-free guild was possible.
Shit happens
How you deal with it determines how good you are at managing. Proactive management is one of the hardest things to do effectively in the entire world and really should only be applied to the really obvious things. The things so obvious that if you don't do them then people that aren't managers are going to bring them up.
Ultimately, embrace the fact that while guild policies are a good thing, that you should reactively implement them 99% of the time.
Basically...
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
If it's broke, fix it.
Play the game first, manage the game second.
- A problem arises
- A policy is put in place
- Order is restored
That's a very reactive management style and feels a lot like a good business environment. It's a good way to handle in a lot of ways too. Here's another situation:
- We think a problem is coming
- We discuss how to avoid the potential problem
- All the management fights -or- A Policy is put in place
- Results Unknown
That's a very proactive management style and feels a lot like the side of business I hate. It usually results in a policy that people don't understand why it even showed up and rarely seems to empathize with everyone's situation.
Is this true though?
Certainly we Proactively put in place policies for Guild recruitment, Loot distribution and other things. I guess the rule of thumb here is to be Proactive its gotta be an obvious and well established need in the industry. Similar to a business needing a vacation policy, a sick policy, etc
Overall though, I'm finding that I gradually started switching from a Reactive Management style to a Proactive Management style. Let me tell ya what... you make less friends being Proactive. It's taken me a bit of soul searching to realize that it's a bad place to be. You don't really want to be proactively managing in WoW. It hits all those bad vibes that people feel every day at their jobs and people don't want WoW to be a job. Or at the very least, they don't want to feel like it is.
So how did I get there?
I got jaded. I got burned. I fixed a lot of problems. I saw a lot of things blow up in my face. I wanted to stop the pain. I was stupid enough to believe that I could. I was stupid enough to believe that a drama-free guild was possible.
Shit happens
How you deal with it determines how good you are at managing. Proactive management is one of the hardest things to do effectively in the entire world and really should only be applied to the really obvious things. The things so obvious that if you don't do them then people that aren't managers are going to bring them up.
Ultimately, embrace the fact that while guild policies are a good thing, that you should reactively implement them 99% of the time.
Basically...
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
If it's broke, fix it.
Play the game first, manage the game second.
Total Comments 9
Comments
-
QFT.Quote:Play the game first, manage the game second.
We've done a fair amount of pro-active stuff leading up to Wrath, but mostly it's just expanding on the TBC transition, to try to avoid some of the same silliness.
A drama free guild is really a fairy tale. Everyone has a bad day, or a life change that effects the game. Especially when you do spend a fair amount of time with a fair number of people. Still, we've been pretty lucky for the past year. Mostly it's about being lucky enough to play with layed back people.
Hopefully you can find your way to a less stressful environment through the transition. I'll be a nice break until 80 at least.Posted 11-06-2008 at 10:27 AM by Kavtor
-
A fair amount of the time I find myself in a 'pick your battles' situation (especially with my 7 year old daughter). Is what I'm going to say or do fix the problem? Will it resolve itself if I leave it alone? Which isn't a cop out, but when playing with adults you would hope that they have some skill at analyzing and problem solving. For some people, especially those in a management position in the guild, they get to refine their interpersonal skills. This often carries over into real life. For me it goes both ways. I'm a nurse on a post-surgical floor and sometimes deal with life and death situations. My perspective of WoW problems is skewed in that..yes it's a game taken too seriously at times, but people feel the way they feel and I have no control over it, same as in real life. I've had humbling experiences both in my profession and in WoW.
I'm curious about how the way good guild leaders/managers effect their guild members. Does the way a guild manager deals with interpersonal conflict/problems effect those folks on the receiving end in real life? Do they reflect on a given experience and learn from it? Do they value the way a team of guild leaders manages the guild? Do they even give it a moment's thought?
If you are in a guild leader position you have the privilege (burden) of dealing with complaints from gmembers. Do you have a standard way of coping with the pressure, solving the problem? I can be confrontational, I can be directional, I can be hands-off, there is no blanket type of reaction to every situation (patience helps).
Policy helps in the regard that it lays out expectations and consequences for acceptable/non-acceptable behavior, much like a boss strategy. If you do X, Y happens, but as we all know there are exceptions to every rule and something goes wrong. I would say that proactive managers are interested in the prevention of problems, you plan for contingency but guess what, contingency can happen no matter your best laid plans. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
/sigh
Keza
If you have not been thanked recently for the job you do in your guild, allow me to express gratitude for your time and contributions.
and I agree that the fun of the game should be #1 priority.Posted 11-06-2008 at 11:27 AM by Keza 
-
Ya, I'm just an officer in the guild and the raid leader. As time has progressed though I've noticed a shift in how I help. This post was more me just recognizing that I've got to go back to how I helped before. You can't proactively solved most problems in WoW.Posted 11-06-2008 at 11:54 AM by veneretio - From my limited experience, I've found that some proactive management is needed, but should be limited. The major reasons for proactive rules that I've seen work the best are for situations you know will come up (loot distribution rules, determining raid attendance, new recruit policies, etc.); but they must be flexible, i.e. standard result for <x> is <y>, but always subject to officer decision.
And always remember that people enjoy playing the game. So keep the time playing up and the time managing down and things will usually turn out better.Posted 11-06-2008 at 12:23 PM by Dahler - I want to start this response by telling you, Venteretio, that I have read much of the content on your site and have a good respect for you and what you bring to the table.
At first glance I suspect you are upset about something specific that had happened, rather than discussing the differences or pros / cons of Proactive vs. Reactive Management. This may be for good reason and I’m not sure that those details are important here.
You highlight some solid points for consideration with regards to the leadership of people. And dealing with people within a game I’ve personally matched that experience up to people that volunteer (be it charity organizations or their kids soccer team).
You mentioned “reactionary” management as a means to deal with issues as they arise. This was then compared to “proactive” management as a means to deal with issues before they arise which was further elaborated on by explaining some potential challenges with this method.
Reactionary
Let’s explore reactionary management a bit more. With a complete reactionary management style you’ve got a situation that comes up which needs attention. This situation is already negative and is causing a problem. Then we discuss with the other leadership or our team as a whole and produce a solution. This solution is then made policy and is our long term solution to avoid this style issue again in the future.
Proactive
Proactive style leading as you suggested would have seen this issue before it showed its ugly head and would have produced (let’s just say) the same policy. However, as you’ve pointed out, the timing of this policy was such that its reception was not positive.
I hope I’m accurate in the manner to which I’ve paraphrased what you wrote so far.
A Healthy Blend
Let me suggest another approach that will help blend the successful elements of both of these styles and I’ll do so by giving an example that every guild should be interested in at this time.
Raiding in vanilla WoW was mostly about 40 man teams. Successful guilds suffered when BC came out as this dropped that raid size down to 10 which then carried over to 25. This process fragmented many guilds of which had to patch things back together again for the 25 man groups. Lich King brings with it some changes to the raid environment as well. So, to learn from past experience we can “Proactively” establish some policies relating to the new raid environment in LK.
Proactively we could decide that 10 mans will continue to be “every man for themselves” and not support them through the direct efforts of the guild leadership. This would then support the guilds interests in raiding 25 man as a guild mission. This proactive thought is discussed with the guild leadership and some boilerplate policies are compiled. This is where the proactive process comes into play.
Then the patience…
We wait till people are at 80 and we learn from what we’ve seen in this time. We may need to revise those boilerplate policies or they may be just fine as is. The idea here is now that people are at 80 and raiding is due to resume it is an appropriate time to introduce (or discuss publically) these new policies.
This also takes into consideration that flexibility element that you brought up.
By not being proactive then you have a scenario where something happens and are not prepared to deal with it at the time. Being proactive like this allows you to respond immediately with either a policy or a policy suggestion.
As a guild leader I am constantly reading on leadership styles, problem resolution and different guild policies. This helps me see issues before they arise and gives me some insight to other people’s challenges and mistakes.
I hope this helped in some way invoke some thought as to another method of working with the challenges of guild leadership. There are no right or wrong answers here, just different ways to progress down the path.Posted 11-06-2008 at 03:32 PM by Falkor - Ya, the point of the post was basically... be proactive about the obvious, but not about everything. I was simply relating my own transition from being more reactionary and shifting to being more proactive and the realization recently that that is a bad thing.
So, from now on I am going to be more reactive again. Not try to fix everything before it happens. The post itself though does not really represent a horrible event or anything. It is just a realization. After all, I led the raids for Ibex for the entire expansion and we never had any real blow ups in over a year. That is an accomplishment.
That does not mean I cannot be better at it for this next expansion though.Posted 11-06-2008 at 03:48 PM by veneretio -
While there are a lot of things where proactive is good, all too often new problems (which management hadn't thought about) arise and what you see is that people try to fit them into the old policy.
This is where proactive fails because all to often it's treated a "the holy grail" and our guild/team/work is going to live by these rules, even if they're incomplete or if they don't apply to new situations.
Ofcourse policies must be in place, but flexibility is key.Posted 11-06-2008 at 06:32 PM by orcstar - I tend to manage proactively when I can. I feel that if I am managing reactively too much then it appears (and maybe correct) that I am not doing my job. I have heard many compliments that my guild is a good place to be because my officers and I are thinking ahead and solving problems before they become a problem. The guild isn't left wondering about how x situation will be handled because they know and can see that it is being worked on.
The solutions do have to be flexibile though and the management needs to be willing to change solution doesn't actually fix the problem.
Also, proactivity means more involvement by the guild as a whole to understand the issues and to help contribute to the solution. Proactivity in a vacuum with mininal flexibility will lead to many more problems than it solves.Posted 11-07-2008 at 08:43 AM by Corrin - Reading this again now and it still seems relevant. I read it when it was new but didn't manage to compose a reply.
I think at a higher level there are two kinds of organization:
- Trusting: There are no rules. People have various kinds of power and prestige. They act with the best intentions. Usually the right thing happens.
- Formal: There are policies. Power and responsibility is clearly defined and bounded. People act rationally within this framework. Bad things are usually avoided.
I'd go for the trusting organization every time. It has dynamism and creativity, but it also has no concept of fairness. It works if everyone is talented and honest. Any mediocre or difficult people will bring this kind of organization down.
The formal organization creates a structure of fairness to deal with mediocrity and selfishness. While this keeps the organization going, and allows it to scale, it's not really confronting those issues. The organization ends up less creative and less fun as a result.
So, I think if you can scale your talented and honest people up to the number you need, do that. If you need more, you probably have to live with with less talent and more rules.Posted 07-23-2009 at 11:44 AM by Machus
