Page 399 - Ray Dalio - Principles
P. 399

b. When a problem occurs, conduct the discussion at two levels: 1) the machine level (why that outcome was produced) and 2)
                    the  case-at-hand  level  (what  to  do  about  it).  Don’t  make  the  mistake  of  just  having  the  case-at-hand
                    discussion, because then you are micromanaging (i.e., you are doing your managee’s thinking and
                    your managee will mistakenly think that’s okay). When having the machine-level discussion, think
                    clearly how things should have gone and explore why they didn’t go that way. If you are in a rush to
                    determine what to do and you have to tell the person who works for you what to do, make sure to
                    explain what you are doing and why.
                    c. When making rules, explain the principles behind them. You don’t want the people you work with to merely
                    pay lip service to your community’s rules; they should have a high sense of ethics that makes them
                    want  to  abide  by  them  and  hold  others  accountable  for  abiding  by  them,  while  also  working  to
                    perfect them. The way to achieve this is via principles that are sound and that have been tested
                    through open discussion.
                    d.  Your  policies  should  be  natural  extensions  of  your  principles.  Principles  are  hierarchical—some  are
                    overarching and some are less important—but they all should inform the policies that guide your
                    individual decisions. It pays to think those policies through to ensure that they are consistent with
                    each other and the principles they are derived from.
                       When faced with a case that doesn’t have a clear policy to follow (for example, what to do about
                    an employee whose job is to travel but who faces potential health risks because of his travel), one
                    can’t just snatch an answer out of the blue without regard for higher-level principles. Policymakers
                    must  make  policy  in  the  same  way  that  the  judicial  system  creates  case  law—iteratively  and
                    incrementally, by dealing with specific cases and interpreting the law as it applies to them.
                       That is how I have tried to operate. When a case arises, I lay out the principles behind how I am
                    handling it and get in sync with others to see if we agree on those principles or must modify them to
                    make  them  better.  By  and  large,  that’s  how  all  Bridgewater’s  principles  and  policies  were
                    developed.
                    e. While good principles and policies almost always provide good guidance, remember that there are exceptions to every rule.
                    While everyone has the right to make sense of things—and is in fact obliged to challenge principles
                    and policies if they conflict with what they believe is the best approach—that’s not the same thing
                    as having the right to change them. Changes in policies must be approved by those who made them
                    (or someone else who has been made responsible for evolving them).
                       When someone wishes to make an exception to an important policy at Bridgewater, they must
                    write up a proposed alternative policy and escalate their request to the Management Committee.

                       Exceptions  should  be  extremely  rare  because  policies  that  have  frequent  exceptions  are
                    ineffective. The Management Committee will formally consider it and either reject it, amend it, or
                    adopt it.


                   10.3    Understand  the  differences  between  managing,
                           micromanaging, and not managing.


                    Great managers orchestrate rather than do. Like the conductor of an orchestra, they do not play an
                    instrument,  but  direct  their  people  so  that  they  play  beautifully  together.  Micromanaging,  in
                    contrast, is telling the people who work for you exactly what tasks to do or doing their tasks for
                    them. Not managing is having them do their jobs without your oversight and involvement. To be
                    successful, you need to understand these differences and manage at the right level.
                    a. Managers must make sure that what they are responsible for works well. They can do this by 1) managing others
                    well  (as  explained  above),  2)  job  slipping  down  to  do  work  they’re  not  responsible  for  because
                    others can’t do their jobs well, or 3) escalating what they can’t manage well. The first choice is
                    optimal; the second signals that a change is needed in the people and the design; the third choice is
                    harder still but mandatory.
                    b. Managing the people who report to you should feel like skiing together. Like a ski instructor, you need to have
                    close contact with your people on the slopes so that you can assess their strengths and weaknesses
                    as they are doing their jobs. There should be a good back-and-forth as they learn by trial and error.
                    With time you will be able to decide what they can and can’t handle on their own.
   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403   404