{"id":21049,"date":"2026-04-13T11:15:37","date_gmt":"2026-04-13T11:15:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ideainthebox.com\/index.php\/2026\/04\/13\/managing-up-a-skill-set-that-matters-now\/"},"modified":"2026-04-13T11:15:37","modified_gmt":"2026-04-13T11:15:37","slug":"managing-up-a-skill-set-that-matters-now","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ideainthebox.com\/index.php\/2026\/04\/13\/managing-up-a-skill-set-that-matters-now\/","title":{"rendered":"Managing Up: A Skill Set That Matters Now"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n\"\"
\n

Carolyn Geason-Beissel\/MIT SMR | Getty Images<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n

Are you skilled at managing up?<\/span> If your talents are lacking when it comes to managing and dealing with the people above you in the organizational hierarchy, you can find yourself mired in some unpleasant and career-harming situations. Maybe you\u2019re frustrated by a micromanaging supervisor or feeling marginalized by them. Maybe you feel constantly in the dark about your manager\u2019s expectations, or you\u2019re tired of absorbing an outsize number of shocks for your team. Any of these can be a warning signal that you need to work on effective upward communication and leadership. <\/p>\n

It\u2019s an important set of skills right now. With some organizations using artificial intelligence to eliminate middle layers of management, the ability to manage up has become even more vital to your career \u2014 and your organization\u2019s success. Leaders above are often unaware of what they don\u2019t know, and they might be misled by AI.<\/p>\n

If you want to strengthen your ability to lead up, you need to know how to assess your skills \u2014 and bolster them.<\/p>\n

We define effective managing up, or upward leadership as \u201clistening to those higher in rank and influencing them to assist you and your team to better embody the organization\u2019s values and fulfill its mission, strategy, and goals.\u201d1<\/a> Successful upward leaders create sustainable wins for the boss, team, and organization.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Notice that this definition starts with listening. Just because someone wrote down the organization\u2019s values, mission, strategy, and goals on ever-available, wallet-sized notecards or displayed them in a flashy PowerPoint graphic does not ensure that everyone will interpret the ideas in a similar and synergistic fashion. The written word is not enough. Understanding the nuances of interpretation requires active listening for unstated sentiments. <\/p>\n

Leading up also, of course, involves influencing. Effective upward leaders establish connections, circumvent problems, and convince those in power to embrace opportunities, innovations, and novel insights. But assisting is equally important. Think of an NBA assist wizard like LeBron James who knows when and where to deliver the ball to other players so they can score. Assisting requires proper alignment between team members, knowledge of who is in position to score, and a willingness to let others shine.<\/p>\n

Three Roles You Play While Managing Up<\/h3>\n

Based on surveys of thousands of employees and hundreds of interviews with midlevel managers, we discerned that people leading up assume three interrelated roles: <\/p>\n

Buffer.<\/strong> The buffer dampens frustrations from above (and below), absorbing complaints, gripes, annoyances, and, potentially, offensive remarks. Successful buffers actively listen for underlying (often unstated) sentiments and seek understanding of key (but often vague) goals to protect others from irrelevant or unintended messages.<\/p>\n

Translator.<\/strong> The translator receives information, directives, and perspectives from above (and below). Then they convey the meaning in the language of the audiences at those levels, minimizing potential misunderstanding while respecting the sensibilities of the audience. <\/p>\n

Advocate.<\/strong> The advocate seeks to persuade or dissuade others in positions above (or below) their own. This could mean sharing differing opinions, arguing for a new direction, or pushing back on a new idea or policy.2<\/a><\/p>\n

It\u2019s not enough to be skilled at one of these roles. Artfully leading upward requires an integration of all three. For example, advocates must translate a pushback comment into a language understood by others while buffering away minor issues. Likewise, a buffer must act as a translator when anticipating how pushback language might be misinterpreted by people above. The translation may, in turn, result in advocating for a change in the directive\u2019s wording to increase the odds of acceptance. <\/p>\n

There is no magic formula to determine the right balance, because it will vary with each situation. However, leaning too heavily into one role usually signals problems. If you, as a leader, spend most of your time buffering employees from verbal storms from on high, then it might be time to augment your role as an advocate. <\/p>\n

Leading upward does not come naturally to most people. In fact, in his 2001 book, Leading Up: How to Lead Your Boss So You Both Win<\/cite>, Wharton professor Michael Useem suggested that just one-third of managerial employees had the necessary skills and desire to do so.3<\/a> But you can rewrite your own story by properly assessing your upward leadership talents and then strategically applying them. <\/p>\n

Assess Your Ability to Manage Up<\/h3>\n

The best way to improve your upward leadership acumen starts with assessing your current talent level. These three questions can help you judge. <\/p>\n

What role do you primarily perform when you are most frustrated?<\/strong> Aggravation, frustration, and irritation go with any job but can also signal role imbalance. For example, if you feel micromanaged, you may be overplaying the buffer role and not voicing concerns (the advocate role) about optimizing your own working environment.<\/p>\n

What role do you primarily perform when you are in a state of flow?<\/strong> In his seminal 2008 book, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience<\/cite>, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes flow as \u201ca sense that one\u2019s skills are adequate to cope with challenges at hand. \u2026 Concentration is so intense that there is no attention left over to think about anything irrelevant.\u201d4<\/a> Ideally, your state of flow involves the skillful and seamless fulfillment of all three roles. But that mastery rarely happens, because we all have a tendency to lean too heavily on a role or skill that comes naturally to us. For example, selling or advocating may be your \u201chappy place,\u201d but leaning on that ability alone will not allow you to excel at upward leadership. For that, you\u2019ll need to master the skills of buffering and translating.<\/p>\n

Are you equally comfortable performing these roles in both directions (upward and downward)?<\/strong> Many people selectively employ their buffering, advocating, and translating skills when communicating with people at higher authority levels. This might be healthy in some cases, but it could also be a red flag, revealing that you lack a healthy relationship with those in power and are unwilling to engage in candid, if sometimes difficult, conversations.<\/p>\n

Build Three Key Skills to Manage Up Better<\/h3>\n

Once you\u2019ve thought through your role tendencies, it is time to build your buffering, translating, and advocating skills. <\/p>\n

Buffering<\/h4>\n

Buffering skills and sensibilities are largely self-taught. Take cues from politicians, coaches, or leaders you admire. Watch successful leaders during press conferences. Some of them ignore the passion of the critic, others deflect unpleasant issues, and some selectively listen for words that they can turn to their advantage. Building up this emotional thick skin takes time and perspective. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Alida Al-Saadi, a former senior executive at Korn Ferry and Accenture, shared this incident: \u201cA manager repeatedly pushed me to be \u2018more concise,\u2019 despite being famously long-winded himself. At first it felt unfair. Eventually I understood that thick skin isn\u2019t arguing the irony; it\u2019s hearing what someone needs from you and deciding, deliberately, how to strategically adjust.\u201d5<\/a> In short, buffering her reactions and deferring the debate about the accuracy of his critique enhanced their working relationship. <\/p>\n

However, buffering does not mean just passively absorbing blows. After all, a shock absorber can only absorb so many shocks before the source of the trouble has to be addressed. Good buffers learn to have productive conversations with their superiors by identifying key issues and rephrasing concerns that might be red flags for their team. Skilled buffers actively listen to engage in productive conversations that support team motivation and performance. This means tuning your antenna to what\u2019s not being said and homing in on ideas that need further development.<\/p>\n

Translating<\/h4>\n

Turning your own or your team\u2019s reactions, concerns, or feelings into words that a superior can understand may be all it takes to shift that leader\u2019s position, tweak an idea, or change a disagreeable behavior; it\u2019s one step short of advocacy. This requires an underappreciated ability to convey emotional reactions in a respectful manner. <\/p>\n

For example, sometimes employees who first hear about a major organizational change react with colorful and offensive language.6<\/a> In those cases, effective leaders accurately relay those sentiments to the higher-ups without sharing personal invectives. A descriptive statement like, \u201cThey weren\u2019t very happy\u201d or \u201cThey expressed their displeasure in strong language\u201d allows for further discussion that focuses on the substantive issues driving the reactions. <\/p>\n

Building your translating skills sometimes means learning new vocabulary. That\u2019s because you should shift your reporting from a direct to an indirect approach for more contentious issues. Directly pushing back with a comment like \u201cI disagree\u201d isn\u2019t always the best option. An indirect and often more effective approach could be to say, \u201cIf someone were to play devil\u2019s advocate, they might say \u2026\u201d or \u201cIs there another way to look at this issue?\u201d These phrases distance the pushback in a manner that does not directly challenge the egos of the people above.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Advocating<\/h4>\n

Speaking up for your team, say, by nudging superiors in a different direction represents the most challenging role. What are the best ways to do it? For starters, link to the superior\u2019s underlying motivations, sensibilities, and mental framework. Successful upward leaders frame their team\u2019s reaction to an idea or policy change by first acknowledging the positive intentions of the idea or policy before sharing the team\u2019s suggested tweaks. <\/p>\n

They also provide evidence that their superiors find credible. Different supervisors value different kinds of evidence to arrive at conclusions. Some put more faith in statistics, AI projections, or models, while others trust case studies, expert advice, personal testimonies, or historical analogies. <\/p>\n

Finally, sense when to back off. Some leaders mistakenly expect quick or even instantaneous agreement from their superiors after proposing initiatives, program tweaks, personnel changes, or innovative suggestions. However, persuasion often requires patience and a willingness to back off at the right time to allow others time to shift the tumblers in their minds before locking something new in place. Pushing too hard or too soon can close the door on any new ideas.<\/p>\n

Habits of Successful Upward Leaders<\/h3>\n

Skill-building sets the stage, but successful upward leaders also use the following strategies regularly to maximize their performance and help their organizations thrive.<\/p>\n

Actively build a relationship of candor and trust with people above you in the hierarchy.<\/h4>\n

Do you reflexively assume that you are fully trusted by those above? A misreading of interpersonal dynamics can prove to be frustrating, befuddling, and problematic, and can introduce relationship troubles: You might excessively buffer the superior from challenges you face in your department (unwarranted buffering), be overly candid about your own reactions or your employees\u2019 outbursts (unedited translating), or offer unwelcome advice (inappropriate advocating). Instead, consider taking the following actions to establish an empowering relationship of trust.<\/p>\n

Take the first step.<\/strong> Ideally, superiors would seek out and build robust, healthy relationships with direct reports. But in our research, we\u2019ve found that to be more the exception than the rule. Consequently, leaders in subordinate positions must often take active steps to build strong, candid relationships.7<\/a> Sometimes that requires the assertiveness and subtlety of a mixed martial arts fighter like Ronda Rousey. Yes, subtlety<\/em>: Rousey was able to persuade the CEO of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, Dana White, to create a women\u2019s division \u2014 even though he had publicly declared that he\u2019d never do it. She took the first step by requesting a 15-minute meeting with Dana, seeking career advice, and then effectively advocated for her idea. The meeting morphed into a 45-minute discussion and resulted in the new UFC women\u2019s division.8<\/a> <\/p>\n

Mind the cadence and robustness of meetings with your supervisors.<\/strong> Your investment in establishing a relationship with superiors can dwindle away without routine and robust communications. The communication cadence needs to keep pace with the fast-changing organizational dynamics. And discussions need to be robust enough to allow the relationship to emerge beyond a position-to-position discussion to more of a person-to-person dialogue. Ideally, that means regularly scheduled face-to-face discussions with your boss, plus skip-level meetings with other people above you in the hierarchy. Advocating for such a time commitment may require some lobbying, but it will spawn benefits by minimizing disconnects and maximizing organizational alignment.9<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

Avoid assuming that what worked with one supervisor will work with another.<\/strong> Just because a previous supervisor trusted you to be a great buffer, translator, or advocate, it doesn\u2019t mean a different person in the organization will. While working with various people in the hierarchy above you, you must seek out signals about what problems you can handle on your own without reporting above (buffering). Additionally, you need to search for cues about what issues are off-limits when considering offering unsolicited advice (buffering and advocacy). Your supervisor might welcome tweaks to organizational strategy, but those higher up may not be as open to the pushback.<\/p>\n

Adopt an educational mindset.<\/h4>\n

George Reed served as a dean at the University of Colorado \u2014 Colorado Springs and an instructor at the U.S. Army War College. He smilingly reminded us, \u201cI\u2019ve had to educate more than a few new chancellors and commanders in my career.\u201d10<\/a> When someone new assumed command, Reed started from zero by providing background about his department or division and then sought to earn trust with the newcomer to buffer, advocate, and translate as he saw fit. <\/p>\n

Emotionally, this may seem like going backward, but it is essential to establishing a productive working relationship. Sometimes a well-selected list of \u201c10 things everybody should know about our department\u201d does the trick and starts an illuminating educational discussion.11<\/a> <\/p>\n

Take the following actions to bolster your educational mindset. <\/p>\n

Assess the risks of advocacy.<\/strong> Deciding how and when to advocate revolves around the question \u201cHow open will my superior be to my influence attempt?\u201d Correcting a client\u2019s misspelled name on a pending document typically would be zero risk. On the other hand, drawing your supervisor\u2019s attention to an annoying personal habit of theirs, such as always being late to meetings, would be a higher risk (as outlined in the table below).<\/p>\n

\n