This is classic "yes, but.." management. Other familiar examples include:
- the kid who brings home her report card with four A+ and one A-. The parent makes no comment about the A+ grades but immediately asks what went wrong in the A- class.
- the sales rep who makes a huge sale only to have the sales manager say something to diminish the accomplishment, "good thing your competitor botched their proposal.."
- the ops manager who had a great year but is told by his VP during the performance review, "You're doing a great job, but I don't believe in giving 5s - nobody is a 5."
- the kid who brings home her report card with four A+ and one A-. The parent makes no comment about the A+ grades but immediately asks what went wrong in the A- class.
- the sales rep who makes a huge sale only to have the sales manager say something to diminish the accomplishment, "good thing your competitor botched their proposal.."
- the ops manager who had a great year but is told by his VP during the performance review, "You're doing a great job, but I don't believe in giving 5s - nobody is a 5."
A burning desire for continuous performance improvement is a great trait in entrepreneurs, owners and managers. But when that desire manifests itself as a reluctance to praise or to praise only with disclaimers, that management behavior becomes an impediment to the ultimate goal - to get better!
I suspect that they fear employees are either going to immediately ask for raises or they're going to become complacent if praised too much. Both academic research and business surveys don't support those assumptions.
A recent example is a LaSalle Network survey that determined that the number one trait of a bad boss is noticing only negative things about a worker's performance. "Yes, but..." management is a version of this - begrudgingly acknowledging good performance, but qualifying it with an observation about a performance flaw. Unfortunately the praise is drowned out by the disclaimer and the power of positive reinforcement is lost or compromised.
When I talk about how much more powerful positive reinforcement is than punishment or extinction (withholding feedback altogether), some managers think I'm espousing a touchy-feely, "everybody gets a trophy even when we lose" management style. But that is not the goal. Poor performance must be addressed. But once it's addressed, acknowledging and reinforcing the improvement is the step many managers miss. Here's a simple example:
Bob is a competent service tech who dresses sloppily. Bob's manager meets with Bob and explains to Bob why his appearance is a problem and specifically tells him what is expected. The next day Bob shows up and looks much better. A "yes, but.." manager might say something like, "it's a big improvement, Bob, but your shoes could be a little shinier." Bob's now thinking, "what's the point of trying?"
A manager who understands the power of positive reinforcement might say, "much better, Bob, thanks." Then a week later the manager might follow-up with, "thanks again, Bob, for taking the time to press your uniform, you look so much more professional than you did before. I've noticed and I'm sure your customers have noticed." Simple, effective positive reinforcement.
So the next time you catch one of your employees doing something right or doing something better, just say, "nice job" and shut up. Anything that follows is not likely to increase motivation - it's more likely to decrease it.
I suspect that they fear employees are either going to immediately ask for raises or they're going to become complacent if praised too much. Both academic research and business surveys don't support those assumptions.
A recent example is a LaSalle Network survey that determined that the number one trait of a bad boss is noticing only negative things about a worker's performance. "Yes, but..." management is a version of this - begrudgingly acknowledging good performance, but qualifying it with an observation about a performance flaw. Unfortunately the praise is drowned out by the disclaimer and the power of positive reinforcement is lost or compromised.
When I talk about how much more powerful positive reinforcement is than punishment or extinction (withholding feedback altogether), some managers think I'm espousing a touchy-feely, "everybody gets a trophy even when we lose" management style. But that is not the goal. Poor performance must be addressed. But once it's addressed, acknowledging and reinforcing the improvement is the step many managers miss. Here's a simple example:
Bob is a competent service tech who dresses sloppily. Bob's manager meets with Bob and explains to Bob why his appearance is a problem and specifically tells him what is expected. The next day Bob shows up and looks much better. A "yes, but.." manager might say something like, "it's a big improvement, Bob, but your shoes could be a little shinier." Bob's now thinking, "what's the point of trying?"
A manager who understands the power of positive reinforcement might say, "much better, Bob, thanks." Then a week later the manager might follow-up with, "thanks again, Bob, for taking the time to press your uniform, you look so much more professional than you did before. I've noticed and I'm sure your customers have noticed." Simple, effective positive reinforcement.
So the next time you catch one of your employees doing something right or doing something better, just say, "nice job" and shut up. Anything that follows is not likely to increase motivation - it's more likely to decrease it.
Guilty as charged. :-( Great advice to make encouragement pure and unadulterated with disclaimers.
ReplyDelete