Bumper Car Management.

Max and Harold Stoehrer of Massachusetts are generally credited with patenting the first electric-powered bumper cars in 1920. The Stoehrer brothers' design was initially made of tin and prone to falling apart upon impact; the cars were paradoxically intended to be avoided, with the company name "Dodgem" reflecting this aim. Needless to say, the sheer joy of controlled collisions quickly overshadowed the dodging idea, leading to the development of more robust designs, and solidifying the bumper car's place as a quintessential amusement park attraction.

In management circles, there are two concepts often referenced when looking at workplace efficiency and personnel management. Peter Drucker's Management by Objectives (MBO), first outlined in his 1954 book "The Practice of Management," is a strategic management approach that aims to improve organizational performance by aligning individual and team goals with the broader objectives of the company. At its core, MBO emphasizes a collaborative process where managers and employees jointly set clear, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) objectives. This participative goal-setting is intended to foster greater employee involvement, commitment, and self-control.

Before Drucker's MBO, there was Frederick Taylor's Management by Exception (MBE). MBE is a time and motion strategy that focuses managerial attention only on deviations from predetermined standards or expected outcomes. MBE empowers employees to handle routine tasks and decisions within established parameters. Managers intervene only when actual results fall outside these acceptable thresholds, indicating an "exception" that requires their attention.

The idea behind both of these strategies is to empower employees with the ability to carry out their roles and responsibilities without undue intervention (i.e. micromanagement). But what happens when an employee falls short of expectations? On the one hand, we want to empower our employees; on the other hand, without regular assessments, check ins, and performance related conversations, there is a risk that the employee may go astray. Arts organizations that are part of larger institutions (City governments, Universities, etc.) often have personnel policies that encourage (or require) managers to set goals, do midyear reviews, have 1:1 meetings, and so forth, in order to establish and maintain expectations of the employee. Smaller arts organizations often lack this rigor, and so they are most at risk of creating unproductive, and sometimes toxic, workplaces.

In the world of Bumper Car Management, the manager "nudges" an employee when they are at risk of getting off track from their goals and the goals of the organization. This benefits both the manager and the employee. Smaller, periodic bumps allow for honest, productive conversations. If they bump back, you gain insight into their challenges and can help them improve. In contrast, managers that avoid talking to their employees about performance issues will find themselves facing head-on impacts, or worse yet, employees that spin off in unfocused and unproductive directions.

The impact of the head-on difficult conversation is felt by both manager and employee. It can be really uncomfortable, and is certainly no fun. So practice nudging and bumping, and challenge yourself to be nudged and bumped back. In the end you might just have a better time.