Pygmalion in Management
In G.B. Shaw’s Pygmalion, Eliza Doolittle explains: “You see, really and truly, apart from the things any one can pick up, [the dressing and the proper way of speaking and so on]; the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves but how she is treated. I shall always be a flower girl to Prof. Higgins, because he always treats me as a flower girl and always will; but I know that I can be a lady to you because you always treat me as a lady and always will.” The effect was originally studied in context of teachers’ expectations of their students: Students who are expected to perform well usually do so. Those students of whom teachers have lower expectations will generally perform less well. However, this approach has clear application in the corporate world. This effect is named after George Bernard Shaw’s play "Pygmalion", which is the basis of the film and stage musical “My Fair Lady”. Shaw summarizes the effect by character Professor Higgins’ observation that:
"...The difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves, but how she's treated."
The Pygmalion Effect helps you think about how your expectations of other people can influence or motivate their performance. It argues that by setting and communicating high performance expectations, you can motivate better performance from the people you lead and manage. Some managers always treat their subordinates in a manner that leads to superior performance. But most managers, like Prof. Higgins, unintentionally treat their subordinates in a way that leads to lower performance than they are capable of achieving. The way managers treat their subordinates is subtly influenced by what they expect out of them. If manager’s expectations are high, productivity is likely to be excellent. If their expectations are low, productivity is likely to be poor.
It is as though there was a law that caused subordinates performance to rise or fall to meet the manager’s expectations!
Scientific researches now reveal:
· What managers expect of their subordinates [and the way they treat them], largely determine their performance and career progress.
· A unique characteristic of superior managers is the ability to create high performance expectations that subordinates fulfill.
· Less effective managers fail to develop similar expectations, and as a consequence, the productivity of their subordinates suffers.
· Subordinates more often than not, appear to do what they believe they are expected to do.
Self-fulfilling prophecies: The influence of one person’s expectations on another person’s behavior is not a business discovery. In the early part of the last century, psychologist Albert Moll concluded from his clinical experiences that subjects behaved as they believed that were expected to. The phenomenon, he observed, in which the “prophecy causes its own fulfillment”, has become a subject of considerable scientific interest. The healing profession has long recognized that physicians or psychiatrists expectations can have a formidable influence on a patient’s physical or mental health. What takes place in the minds of the patients and the healers, particularly when they have congruent expectations may determine the outcome. For instance, the havoc of a doctor’s pessimistic prognosis has been observed again and again.
It is also well known that the efficacy of anew drug or a new treatment can be greatly influenced by the physicians expectations – a result referred to as the placebo effect.
Pattern of failure: When medical representatives are treated by their district managers as ‘super-people’, they try to live up to that image. And do what they know ‘super medical representatives’ are supposed to do. But when the medical representatives are treated by their managers as not having “any chance” of success, this negative expectation also becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Unsuccessful medical representatives have great difficulty in maintaining their self-image and self-esteem. In response to low managerial expectations, they typically attempt to prevent additional damage to their egos by avoiding situations that might lead to greater failure. They either reduce the number of sales calls [or call on ‘easy’ doctors only] or avoid trying to ‘close’ sales that might result in further painful rejection or both.
Low expectations and damaged egos lead them to behave in a manner that increases the probability of failure – thereby fulfilling their managers expectations. Power of expectations
Managers cannot avoid the depressing cycle of events that flow from low expectations merely by hiding their feelings from the subordinates. If managers believe that their subordinates will perform poorly, it is virtually impossible for them to mask their expectations because the message is usually conveyed unintentionally, without conscious action on their part.
Indeed managers communicate the most when they believe they communicate the least. For instance, when they say nothing – become cold and uncommunicative – it is usually a sign that they are displeased by a subordinate or believe that he or she is hopeless. The silent treatment communicates negative feelings even more effectively, at times, than a tongue-lashing does.
What seems to be critical in the communication of expectations is not what the boss says so much as the way he or she behaves. Indifferent and noncommittal treatment, more often than not, is the kind of treatment that communicates low expectations and leads to poor performance.
Common illusions Managers are more effective in communicating low expectations to their subordinates than in communicating high expectations to them, even though most mangers believe exactly the opposite. Positive feelings, on the other hand do not come through clearly enough. Clearly the way managers treat subordinates, not the way they organize them, is the key to high expectations and high productivity.
Impossible Dreams
Management expectations must pass the test of reality before it can be translated into performance. Subordinates will not be motivated to reach high levels of productivity unless they consider the bosses high expectations realistic and achievable. If they are encouraged to strive for unattainable goals, they eventually give up trying and settle for results that are lower than that hey are capable of achieving.
Scientific research by David McClelland of Harvard University and of John Atkinson of the University of Michigan, has demonstrated that the relationship of motivation to expectancy varies in the form of a bell shape curve. The degree of motivation and effort rises until the expectancy of success reaches 50%, and then begins to fall even though the expectancy of success continues to increase. No motivation or response is aroused when the goal is perceived as being virtually certain or virtually impossible to attain. Failure of subordinates to meet the unrealistically high expectations of their managers leads to high rates of attrition – either voluntarily or involuntarily.
Secret of superiority Something that takes place in the minds of a superior manager that does not take place in the minds of a less effective manager. While superior managers are consistently able to create high performance expectations that their subordinates fulfill, weaker managers are not successful in obtaining a similar response. What accounts for the difference? The superior managers have greater confidence than other managers in their own ability to develop the talents of their subordinates.
Contrary to what might be assumed, the high expectations of superior managers are based primarily on what they think about themselves – about their own ability to select, train and motivate their subordinates, what they expect of them, and how they treat them. In other words, the superior manager’s record of success and their confidence in their ability give their high expectations credibility. As a consequence their subordinates accept these expectations as realistic and try hard to achieve them.
Vivek Hattangadi
theenablers@gmail.com