I have a question... Which is the better management approach- 1) If a manager has the skills to help the employees by rolling up their sleeves and pitching in they should. But it should be the exception not the rule. 2) If a manager has the skills to help the employees by rolling up heir sleeves and picthing in they should NOT. Managers should manage and not do the work of the employees.
I say number one There's a reason that people who aren't doing anything while people are working around them are referred to as "supervising". But still, I'd agree that it should be the exception, not the rule. -=Steve=-
Absolutely, a manager should pitch in, when it makes sense. One situation that comes to mind is training a new employee, coming in to fix a mistake someone else made, pitching in when the office/factory/restaurant gets slammed. Of course if the manager is working an employee's job and all of a sudden they are needed in the supervisory capacity then there's a problem, so it should be an exception not the rule. But refusing to get your hands dirty ever is not a good attitude. This reminds me of a horrible waitressing job I had aeons ago at Benigan's. This was the worst, most stupidly set-up lowest-tipping restaurant job I ever had and I ended up quitting in disgust after 2 weeks. I remember during St. Patrick's day things were pretty hectic. In fact at the other Benigan's across town there was a riot. Our manager was running around telling people what to do. He nagged the bartender one too many times... the bartender hurled a rack of glasses to the floor, screamed a few curses and ran out. The manager had to take over the bar for the rest of the night! Not sure what the moral is there, other than "if you don't want to pitch in during an emergency you might end up having to anyway".
