Two Reasons Why It’s Time to Change the “Manager” Title

Take a moment and look up “manager” in the dictionary and you might be surprised. It is someone who is responsible for controlling or administering activities. There is no mention of people. Strange, isn’t it? When we use the word manager don’t we think of the management of people? And, even if the definition included “people” as something controlled or administered, is that really what we mean?


If you want to change a person’s behavior it’s useful to change their thinking first. How can you change a person’s thinking? Change their language. We need to stop using the word “manager” for two reasons: First, a manager really doesn’t control ANYTHING. That’s a myth. Control is an outcome of a predictable process and even that is a myth because there is always variation. Nothing is ever perfectly controlled. Events occur within a manageable predictable range.

Control is not a strategy, it is an outcome. The dictionary makes it sound like a task or a strategy. This thought leads to poor decisions and poor policy. Two policies that most managers (80-90% by some studies) embrace are pay-for-performance and performance appraisals. Both of these are designed to control behaviors. How well are those policies working for you in your organization? If you are like most managers these policies are a constant source of frustrations and dysfunctional behaviors.

Secondly, people really can’t be controlled and anyone with a teenager knows that to be true. This idea of control perpetuates “manager dependent” behavior in our organizations. Employees who are dependent upon their manager to make decisions are not fully engaged. I believe the continued use of the word manager is a barrier to full employee engagement.

Think about it, can you really control anyone’s behavior? If they don’t want to do something they won’t. We can make laws and policies and still see poor behavior. In my State of Connecticut it’s illegal to drive and talk on a cell phone. Every day I see someone breaking this law. Clearly the law is not going to control this behavior. Something else needs to happen.

If the title of manager is inappropriate than what should we use instead? Here are two suggestions: “Process Facilitator” and/or “Human Potential Leader”. Allow me to channel Dr. W. Edwards (the father of Quality Improvement) for a moment. Control is an outcome and has a very specific definition for quality circles. Technically it means a process is predictable within a given range of variation.

For example, most people generally work around 40 hours a week. If we plotted the actual data of the number of hours you work each week we would see variation. It would “probably” not be exactly 40 hours. It might be 41 or 39 and the average would “probably” come in around 40 hours. I am using the word “probably” because managing variation within a process has to do with probability not control.

A manager must identify and influence factors that impact the variation. Deming would say a manager’s job is to be able to predict what a process(s) will do. A manager therefore improves predictability and reduces drama. A manager is therefore a proactive “Process