Leaving `yes-man' phenomenon to be able to say `no'

Leaving `yes-man' phenomenon to be able to say `no'

By Rohmad Hadiwijoyo

ARLINGTON, Virginia, U.S.A. (JP): Before delegates sit down at
the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Jakarta later
this year we must answer a pressing question: how can small
business and technology transfer be successful if Indonesians
haven't yet established strong human resources.

The common problem Indonesians have these days, especially
government employees, is being unable to say "no".

Asserting our position or opinion to others becomes extremely
difficult when disagreement arises between business partners.
More often than not we will simply smile and go along with the
decision, knowing full well that something is wrong. Most of the
time we even enthusiastically become "yes-men" which is
reflected in the famous local catchword "asal bapak senang" or
shortened to "ABS!" (as long as sir is happy).

We are our own worse enemies. Our habit is lethal, especially
during technology transfer where information is vital and where
we undermine the decision making process. The recent Bapindo case
also shows the effects because the branch manager was unable to
assert his position to stop others from using his power to lend
the bank into bankruptcy.

When we say "yes-sir," we avoid the responsibility of decision
making. The future of our market is too precious for us to
continue this practice.

According to experts this apathetic trend is characteristic
of people who want to be included in the flow of a group. If we
go a step further and apply this to business managers, we can
assume they would be more concerned with a happy and harmonious
work force and try to find ways to stop production from
pressuring people.

The `yes-man' syndrome can also happen when the peer pressure
is so strong in a group that no one wants to play the devil's
advocate. As a result, they immediately agree to anything that is
put forth -- even at the expense of the organization.

All aside, we must determine how we can limit ourselves from
being harmed by "yes men" in the competitive 1990s. First, what
are the environmental factors that influence people who revert to
this? And secondly, how does it affect organizational
development?

Culture is a culprit of the "yes-man" syndrome, and
unfortunately everyone and their brother has a different
definition of it.

Another possibility is a lack of managerial and leadership
qualities. If the manager isn't sensitive to the needs of his
workers or doesn't have an understanding of cultural diversity,
the employees will be pressured into being more passive.

For sure, APEC must consider this environment when dealing
with human resource issues because of the rapid interdependence
of economies. As more companies invest in foreign lands, the
management of each must make the effort to adapt rather than use
their personal management styles which prove so useful "back
home."

Another culprit leading us into relying on "yes- men" is the
lack of communication skills. Since nothing can be completed by
an organization without communication, the whole exercise is
undermined.

Many times, the 'yes-man' will not honestly speak his mind so
as to make his partner happy. Friendship and loyalty are more
important to him, so good relationships will result.

Pragmatic managers need feedback to weed out bad decisions
from the good. And in the end, the fence sitters simply confuse
the situation and destroy the production of the organization.

In traditional management, the "yes man" syndrome is an
appropriate tool in order to find a resolution because in their
eyes, the decision no longer becomes the issue to be resolved,
but the conflict. And that itself deepens the entire problem.

We are nearing the 21th century and already changes are being
felt from everything from the so-called "Generation X" to
interactive television. Multinational corporations have already
spent the last two decades "testing the water" and now it is time
for them to make up their minds on a game plan.

They must have realized that the key factor for dealing with
competition is information. How can managers keep one step ahead
of the game with a team that sits rather than works? For one, he
will have to make judgments and decisions on intuition and with
irrelevant information.

But the result will be unstable, and most likely he will be
counting the days until he finds himself out of a job.

The "yes men" undermine the utilities of human resources and
therefore ruins the possible success of technology transfer. And
they can also bring a small business to an early grave.

The value of the decision of the manager is worth only what
his employees put in, and if they are apathetic, then the entire
exercise will fail.

"Yes-men" cannot be stopped but managers do have many tools
to make quality decisions, says Linda J. Martin in her article in
the Journal of Portfolio Management of Spring 1985. They are
`representativeness', `availability' and `anchoring'.

Each describes how managers can categorize the problem so as
to resolves it quickly and with better chances for success.

Under `representativeness', they can compare similar
characteristics of the pressing issue with a previously resolved
one to stereotype certain outcomes. In addition, they could
utilize the second tool, `availability,' to use previous
solutions to solve the problem of dishonest information. Lastly,
they can use `anchoring' to base his decision on predictions.

What is important is how we, as people and managers, handle
the "yes-man" syndrome. Edward C. Bursk in his book, The Word of
Business laid out four useful concepts which should always be
considered to maintain good human resources.

1. That the forces in business are nurtured by the existence
of differences between individuals and a group.

2. That these forces are kept in control and balance by the
process of individuals understanding each other.

3. That a creative society depends on its survival upon the
belief that rights must be matched by obligations.

4. That the directing force in a creative society is the faith
of its members in individual growth.

Today's global managers must learn new traits of flexibility,
adaptability, openness and trust. Throughout the business
process, pathways must be pruned constantly to reduce the
bureaucracy and friction in groups. One must also broadly define
for himself cultural diversity, conflict and communication as
parts of management dynamism and also as a tool to improve
decision making, not to hinder it.

The APEC participants, especially Indonesia, should make every
effort to deal with the problem of human resources for the next
century. Our country has come a long way from being a Dutch
colony to the leader of the Non-Aligned Movement. Our president
can only take us so far until the problems we have inside
ourselves get in the way. It is time for us as workers, managers
and civil servants to step away from the fence and say "no, sir"
instead of saying "yes"!

The writer is a graduate student at the School of Business and
Public Management, George Washington University, Washington, D.C.