Work Maturity Levels: one person, four management styles

Why it matters

Three definitions hold the whole model together.

Cooperation is the conscious activity of a group of people moving in the same direction to achieve shared goals. A goal is an agreed desired result: specific, achievable and time-bound. Efficiency is the ratio of results to costs.

The Russian banker Herman Gref has observed that everyone’s products are roughly the same; the difference lies in management and in the team that delivers the product. Hence the question the model answers: how to make cooperation more productive and reach maximum efficiency with each employee.

A system like this is usually explained only to managers. At MezEx we are convinced that every employee should understand it: why some colleagues get less control and others more, why some enjoy privileges at work and others do not, why communication takes different forms — and how to influence all of this. The key to the system is the Work Maturity Level (WML; in Russian, УРЗ).

The formula: WML = min(C; I)

WML is built from two four-step scales: competence (C) and involvement (I), that is, attitude to the work. The resulting level equals the lower of the two.

This leads to an uncomfortable but useful conclusion: the “professional saboteur” and the “enthusiastic newbie” are equally ineffective. The first can but won’t; the second will but can’t yet. Both are dangerous: an intern in love with the job can make a mess without noticing, while a master saboteur is like a dissident.

A little arithmetic. Four steps of competence by four steps of involvement give 16 combinations. Seven of them lead to level 1, five to level 2, three to level 3 and exactly one to level 4: the maximum on both scales. There are seven ways to end up at level 1 and only one way to reach level 4.

A drop in involvement hits efficiency hard, and through it the final results. Recognising your current WML correctly means growing in parallel, in both competence and involvement. With an involved specialist who already has a body of knowledge, moving up the levels is easier.

In spirit the model is close to Hersey and Blanchard’s situational leadership; here it is assembled as a working tool for the MezEx team.

Four levels, four styles

Each level calls for its own style of interaction (management): WML 1 — instruction, WML 2 — mentoring, WML 3 — coaching, WML 4 — delegation. Choosing the wrong style is certain to lower the results on the task.

WML	Competence	Involvement	Style	Efficiency up to
1. The resisting intern	No proven experience	Resists the task	Instruction	25%
2. Routine, but it has to be done	Experience with intermediate tasks	Does the work, not responsible for the outcome	Mentoring	45%
3. I can. I know how. I practise	Standard project with guaranteed quality	Responsible for their part of the project	Coaching	65%
4. The master in love	Mastery, non-standard solutions	Responsible for the success of the whole project	Delegation	100%

WML 1. The resisting intern

There is no proven experience: this is a new employee or someone in a new position. The attitude to the task is resistance — hidden or open, sometimes aggressive, sometimes driven by the fear of looking “bad”. The person is responsible neither for the result nor for the process. The efficiency ceiling is 25%.

The style is instruction: we command and we control; strict authoritarianism. The task sounds simple: “This needs to be done.” Instructions are clear, information comes in small portions and from the top down, and initiative is not requested. Work rests on execution discipline on an “event — reaction” basis, and learning means reading standard instructions. Control is frequent, step-by-step and time-based, down to micro-tasks. Good work is praised; poor work gets an explanation of how it should be done.

WML 2. Routine, but it has to be done

There is experience, but only with intermediate tasks: the person has done the job in parts. They do the work but are not responsible for the final result. They want to be right and look for someone to blame; it is never “we”, always “you”, never “ours”, always “yours”. The favourite formula: “The manager is the one responsible.” The ceiling is 45%.

The style is mentoring: we command and support; soft authoritarianism. The task is not simply set but “sold”, with an explanation of why it matters: “It would be good if…”, “I would like…”. Instructions are extended, and information still flows from the top down. The emphasis is on strengths and proven experience; learning happens in internal training sessions. During the work, control is periodic and selective; at acceptance, the result is checked in full — the result, not the process. Motivation comes from past successes and rewards.

Between levels 2 and 3 the model draws a line it calls the responsibility gap: at levels 1–2 a person is not responsible for the outcome; at levels 3–4 they are.

WML 3. I can. I know how. I practise. With pleasure

The person delivers a standard project with guaranteed quality and is responsible for their part of it. They are focused on the goal; their phrase is “I’ll do everything I can!” The ceiling is 65%.

The style is coaching: support, partnership, learning; a democratic style. The manager sets the goal, and the ways to reach it are worked out together: even for a standard task, the best method is sought. It is a conversation between professionals, with information flowing both ways. The work follows the GROW model: productive ideas are approved, unproductive ones are corrected; learning takes the form of seminars and off-site training. What is controlled is the result, and acceptance is “yes” or “no” with explanations. Motivation comes from the manager’s attention to expertise, cash bonuses and the chance to become an expert. Asking for the employee’s opinion is a must.

WML 4. The master in love (and Bulgakov has nothing to do with it)

Mastery: non-standard solutions and improvisation. The person takes responsibility for the success of the whole project and is calm and confident. Their phrase: “I’ll do more than I can.” The ceiling is 100%.

The style is delegation: handing over full responsibility for decisions; a liberal style. Setting the task means stating the goal. The master knows a better way than the manager, so only the desired result and the acceptable range are discussed, with information flowing both ways. They organise the process themselves, and learning means support in whatever they themselves care about. Only the end result is controlled: “yes” or “no”, and after a “no” they look for a new solution on their own. Work is assessed by inner satisfaction and deviation from the goal; motivation comes from cash bonuses, a “challenge”, an ambitious goal and interesting work.

Five principles

1. Situational management. The same specialist needs different styles — for different tasks, at different times, in different circumstances.
2. Nobody has a “base” WML. A level is assigned only for a specific task; this is the model’s “fourth dimension”. You can be a top-notch developer on the 1C business platform and a hopeless manager; a strong marketer is unlikely to draft a leasing contract; a level-4 programmer will not be a level-4 lawyer. There are no universal people with WML 4, and carrying a level over “by analogy” from one task to another is not allowed: it leads to errors in interaction.
3. A mistake is not a personality trait. Attitude to a task and qualification are not characteristics of the person. Anyone can make mistakes.
4. There are no “stupid” or “harmful” people in the company. Either we are using the wrong methods of interaction, or we are working with the wrong people.
5. Qualification is checked by peers or seniors. Only someone with the same or higher qualification can verify it.

And some good news: a person with well-developed cognitive skills and the habit of taking responsibility for results can be brought into any position relatively easily.

Limiting patterns, or managers slip up too

Employees are not the only ones who make mistakes. The model describes four traps for managers. The digits in each name read as style numbers (1 — instruction, 4 — delegation) that the manager cycles through without looking at the employee’s WML on the task.

• “2-3-2. Let’s talk.” Too many meetings, weak execution discipline, no professional trust.
• “1-4-1. Instruct and vanish.” Give an instruction, disappear, come back to scold. In short: from one telling-off to the next.
• “3-4-3. Make it look nice.” No clear tasks; progress is a matter of chance.
• “1-2-1. Wooden soldiers.” Total control, scarce resources. Strong people leave; what remains is irresponsibility and decaying skills.

The ideal job: 25-5-3-2

The ideal job contains tasks at all four levels. The model’s benchmark is 25-5-3-2: twenty-five tasks where the person is at WML 4 (routine), five at WML 3 (“tomorrow”), three at WML 2 (tactics) and two at WML 1 (strategy).

Most tasks should be at level 4: this is the zone of maximum efficiency. A few tasks of strategic importance, where there is no experience yet, bring development and interest. The bottom line fits into one formula: the right profile = interesting work.

A manager’s checklist

1. Do I assess WML for a specific task rather than “the person in general”?
2. Do I look at both scales — competence and involvement — and take the lower one?
3. Does the style match the level: 1 — instruction, 2 — mentoring, 3 — coaching, 4 — delegation?
4. Does the employee know in advance how the result will be accepted — from step-by-step control to a simple “yes” or “no”?
5. Is qualification assessed by someone at the same or a higher level?
6. Are mistakes treated as a question of method rather than personality?
7. Am I stuck in “Let’s talk”, “Instruct and vanish”, “Make it look nice” or “Wooden soldiers”?
8. Does everyone’s job include tasks at all four levels, roughly in the proportion 25-5-3-2?

If every answer is yes, consider the material learned.