Bob was late for work again today. It's only a few minutes, but I'm afraid if I don't say something, it'll be a few more minutes tomorrow and a few more the day after that. When do I write him up?
Front line managers face these dilemmas all the time. On the one hand, they know that bad behavior that is not condemned is condoned. On the other hand, they know that if they write people up for every minor infraction, they'll spend an inordinate amount of time processing and documenting write-ups. And the employee being written-up will likely retreat into some deeper level of disengagement - the last thing you want from an employee who is basically a solid contributor with a few flaws.
Some managers take the cautious route and document everything, to the detriment of employee engagement. On the other extreme are managers who don't document anything, then terminate their "Bobs" when they've reached a breaking point. Unfortunately these managers have nothing to use in the defense of an unemployment charge, or worse, an EEOC charge.
Here's a few tips:
1. Distinguish between a true policy violation and a manager pet peeve. Using the "Bob is late" example, the manager needs to ask, is being on-time a basic job requirement for Bob's position? For many roles, being on-time is essential. If the phones start ringing at 8:00 and Bob's the receptionist or a CSR, he needs to be at his station at 8:00 or someone else is forced to do his job. But nit-picking start and stop times with an exempt employee whose immediate presence or absence at 8:00 a.m. doesn't really impact the team or their ability to produce their assigned workload can actually be counter-productive.
2. Start with a conversation. For most relatively minor but annoying infractions where the employee is drifting from standard expectations, simply having a brief conversation with the employee may be enough to get your Bob back on the right path. But be sure to make a note to yourself that you held the conversation with Bob on this day, so that, if necessary, you can...
3. Cleverly get your verbal warning into the record. One way to do that is with a follow-up email. Sometimes the email can even be phrased positively: "Bob, I was pretty direct with you yesterday when we spoke about your struggles to get to work on time, but I want you to know that if you can get that issue under control, there's no reason why you can't have a prosperous career here. You have the skills necessary to be successful." The second way is to let the conversation suffice until the behavior appears again. Let's say two weeks after the conversation Bob is late again. The manager moves to a more formal write-up and includes language like, "On July 11 we had a conversation about your lateness to work an how it affects the team. Today you were late again..." Now, with Bob's signature, you have both the verbal warning and the written warning on the record, but only shoved one piece of paper in front of Bob to sign and it wasn't on his first offense.
Progressive Discipline
The larger the organization, the more it benefits from a formal, defined, progressive discipline process. But most of my clients are small or mid-sized and reside in right-to-work-states, so I don't recommend a formal process for them. I want my clients to legally be able to rid themselves of an employee who is bad for their organization without violating their own policies. If your progressive discipline policy is too defined, bad employees can dance around the edges for months or even years without ever crossing the final line. The company can become a victim of its own policy.
With major infractions like violence, threats of violence, sexual/racial/ethnic harassment, theft, fraud, etc., it's certainly not necessary to go through any progressive process (just make sure your handbook is clear about that), but for the types of behavioral or performance issues that tend to build frustration from management over time, you need some type of evidence that you've made a good faith effort to clarify your expectations for Bob's performance and that Bob has acknowledged that you've done so. So starting with a conversation or two, moving to a counseling form that is signed by Bob that incorporates the prior verbal conversations into the record can do that nicely. Make sure the counseling form clearly defines what policy or procedure Bob failed to follow and what your expectations are for Bob going forward.
Then, when you're finally fed-up with Bob, you have a nice paper trail to show an unemployment referee demonstrating what a patient and fair employer you've been. You might even have a shot at winning those difficult to win unemployment charges. But don't wait until you're fed-up with Bob before you start the documentation trail.
Sunday, July 9, 2017
Is Being a Team Player Important?
We often use the term "team player" to describe an employee who gets along with others, works well on team projects, and/or is willing to contribute discretionary effort toward the organization's goals. It's important for every organization to recognize the true importance of team skills as a success factor and a selection criteria for job candidates. Here's two examples to demonstrate the subtle difference:
Jane is a commissioned outside sales rep with a defined territory. She's a hunter and spends most of her time seeking out new sales opportunities as opposed to taking orders from existing clients. She has the technical knowledge to make the sale on her own without the assistance of technical support staff and she's not dependent on marketing or back office people to prepare proposal documents or support the sales process. When she makes the sale, she turns the order over to operations personnel and moves on to the next prospect.
Sally is a sales/marketing rep and earns a straight salary. Her primary job is to get appointments with decision makers in order to bring in a technical expert to wow the client with the company's capabilities. After the sale is made, Sally works with a team of people to pull together the solution for the prospect and she remains the primary point of contact for both implementation and customer questions or concerns going forward. She is also responsible for identifying potential future sales with that same client.
If either Jane or Sally should leave their respective organizations, which company should be more concerned with whether or not potential replacements are "team players." Obviously Sally's role requires much more interaction with co-workers and the successful candidate to replace her needs to be someone who plays well in the sandbox with others. In reality, Jane could be perceived as difficult to work with and uncooperative from the perspective of her co-workers and still be a rock-star when it comes to her core job duties - making rain! Over-weighting team skills during the selection process for Jane's replacement could result in overlooking the candidate who might have delivered the strongest results.
You can apply the same logic to multiple roles in your organization - how important is it that this individual be able to work well with other people? If the role is really designed for an individual contributor, someone who sits in a back office and cranks out work without need to interact with others, the organization should look for someone who scores high for traits such as Commanding, Resourceful and Intentional. If the role is really designed for someone whose work frequently interacts with other team members, the organization should look for someone who scores high for traits like Collaborative, Selfless and Harmonious.
How do you identify those traits during the selection process? A) You ask behavioral interview questions targeted at those motivators and B) you give them a pre-employment assessment that measures those internal motivators. Don't currently use a motivators assessment? Contact me and I'll show you a great one that will help your organization make better hiring decisions.
Jane is a commissioned outside sales rep with a defined territory. She's a hunter and spends most of her time seeking out new sales opportunities as opposed to taking orders from existing clients. She has the technical knowledge to make the sale on her own without the assistance of technical support staff and she's not dependent on marketing or back office people to prepare proposal documents or support the sales process. When she makes the sale, she turns the order over to operations personnel and moves on to the next prospect.
Sally is a sales/marketing rep and earns a straight salary. Her primary job is to get appointments with decision makers in order to bring in a technical expert to wow the client with the company's capabilities. After the sale is made, Sally works with a team of people to pull together the solution for the prospect and she remains the primary point of contact for both implementation and customer questions or concerns going forward. She is also responsible for identifying potential future sales with that same client.
If either Jane or Sally should leave their respective organizations, which company should be more concerned with whether or not potential replacements are "team players." Obviously Sally's role requires much more interaction with co-workers and the successful candidate to replace her needs to be someone who plays well in the sandbox with others. In reality, Jane could be perceived as difficult to work with and uncooperative from the perspective of her co-workers and still be a rock-star when it comes to her core job duties - making rain! Over-weighting team skills during the selection process for Jane's replacement could result in overlooking the candidate who might have delivered the strongest results.
You can apply the same logic to multiple roles in your organization - how important is it that this individual be able to work well with other people? If the role is really designed for an individual contributor, someone who sits in a back office and cranks out work without need to interact with others, the organization should look for someone who scores high for traits such as Commanding, Resourceful and Intentional. If the role is really designed for someone whose work frequently interacts with other team members, the organization should look for someone who scores high for traits like Collaborative, Selfless and Harmonious.
How do you identify those traits during the selection process? A) You ask behavioral interview questions targeted at those motivators and B) you give them a pre-employment assessment that measures those internal motivators. Don't currently use a motivators assessment? Contact me and I'll show you a great one that will help your organization make better hiring decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)