Due Diligence

Performance Appraisals for Difficult Employees – Part II

by

We talked in Part I about preparing for the performance appraisal meeting.  In Part II, let’s look at a couple of strategies you might consider for the actual meeting.

It’s hard not to think in some situations that the performance appraisal review with a difficult employee won’t deteriorate to a confrontation.  If the employee weren’t having or displaying problem behaviors there wouldn’t be a need to prepare for a difficult meeting, right?  Even though you prepare for a confrontation, your tone of voice and body language need to be as neutral as possible. If you go into the meeting loaded for bear that message will come through clearly and nothing will be accomplished.  Before the meeting take a couple of moments to take a deep breath and calm yourself.  It really does work.

When the meeting begins, clearly state the purpose of the meeting. This is a performance appraisal meeting and it is about the employee, not about you. Also remember that this is not a negotiation meeting.  As the supervisor you have observed good things and areas where improvements could be made. Start out with a positive comment, if possible. For example, if the employee has shown improvement in an area that was discussed during the last review period, make note of that.

In as even a tone of voice as possible, describe the areas where improvements are needed. Again, if progress has been made, reiterate that. But if there are areas which were brought to the employee’s attention and which did not show improvement during the recent review period that needs to be discussed.  Keep your focus on the facts. Whenever possible, give specifics as to dates and times when tasks were not completed or submitted late.  Detail the problems areas with as much specificity as possible.  You’re never going to be voted as supervisor of the year but you’ll  have the satisfaction of knowing that you’ve done the best job you can under difficult circumstances.

End the discussion of the performance on as positive a note as possible. Compliment a positive skill. Next, set an interim review date to monitor the progress. Work with the employee to set a time that will allow the employee to make the required changes in performance and to establish a positive track record.

Some thoughts

by

I was fortunate to spend time at Walt Disney World recently and I was struck by the change in people as they stood in line for rides, food, etc.  The Disney corporation has certainly created a happy place for millions of visitors.   Another thought also struck me.  Disney could not successfully create such a place if it were a truly horrible corporation in which to work as some media stories over the years have tried to portray.

If you’re going to be an effective leader you need to understand that happy employees make far more significant and positive contributions to the success of your organization.  Those contributions tend to improve the bottom line as well.  Making sure your employees are “happy” doesn’t mean bending over backwards and kowtowing to every demand.  It does mean that you lead effectively.  That means you educate yourself on the importance of group dynamics, especially in your organization, and use those dynamics in a positive way to achieve your organizational goals.  It means being fair and consistent in your dealings with people.  Customer service is important especially when extended to employees.  Set goals that both challenge and fulfill your staff.  Work should never be toxic but hard work never hurt anyone.  Have the courage and persistence to look at the way work gets done and see if new ways might be more effective and profitable.  Don’t settle for mediocre either in yourself or your staff.  Knowledge and proper use of group dynamics can lead to a workplace where everyone dares to be extraordinary.  How bad can that be?

Group Dynamics – Who cares?

by

Someone once told me that the definition of insanity was trying the same solution to a problem over and over again, all the while hoping for a different outcome.  Sound familiar?  Perhaps your continuing problems might be the result of not fully understanding group dynamics and the importance they can play in the smooth operation of your organization.  But why should you be concerned with something you’ve called psychological babble?  After all, aren’t you the boss?  The problems will go away just as soon as people realize you’re in charge and they have to do what you tell them.  You’ve told your staff this in some form or another how many times?  I’m curious – if that approach hasn’t worked (and it obviously hasn’t since the problems haven’t gone away) why are you so reluctant to try a different approach using a professional problem solver?

No matter what your personal opinion might be about the social sciences, research has demonstrated that the concept of group dynamics is valid. Knowledge of how groups work, especially small groups, is essential to being an effective leader and manager.  Group dynamics affect more than just the morale of the organization.  They can impact communication and productivity.  Something to consider over the next few days, don’t you think?

It’s a New Year!

by

Happy New Year.  More than ten days into the new year and are you reviewing all those resolutions yet?  Was one of them to resolve once and for all the personnel problems which have been around for far too long? Is it finally time to get the stockholders (especially Aunt Nell and that nephew of hers) off your back? Just exactly how do you plan to do this?

Even with the new year the proposed solution from last year needs to be seriously considered. You need to hire a professional problem solver.   But keep in mind that professional problem solvers are not miracle workers. If you expect the problem solver to snap his or her fingers and shazam! – the problem is solved,  I’m afraid you’re going to be bitterly disappointed. But perhaps that attitude could help explain your procrastination. Unless you’re polishing silver or washing windows where the results of your efforts are immediately noticeable, the results of effective problem solving will take some time to be evident. Even a gourmet meal or an excellent cocktail takes some work and some time.

How much longer can you afford to ignore the problem(s) or engage in ineffective solutions? When you’ve run out of ideas please give me a call.  At the very least I can listen.

I’m Repeating Myself

by

Have you all noticed a consistent theme running through my blogs?  You know what I’m talking about – those comments about why hiring a professional problem solver makes good sense.  When you think about it, hiring someone to help solve the problems makes sense from  a few  perspectives.  It makes sense from the HR or personnel perspective.  Having an objective set of eyes look at the problems or issues and take stock of the players involved is never a bad thing.  From the financial perspective the funds expended to pay for the consultant will be more than made up for by the increased revenues coming from higher productivity, better morale, and greater effectiveness all around.  Now think of your next stockholders meeting.  How more comfortable are you going to be describing the increased productivity and revenues?  Isn’t that a better prospect than having to hear from stockholders about what a lousy job you’re doing and what exactly are you doing to solve those problems?  Any approach which increases revenues by implementing long term solutions to persistent problems can’t be all bad.  Best of all, it will keep Aunt Nellie off your back – at least for a little while.  Just that alone makes the hiring of a professional problem solver worth it, don’t you think?

One of those days

by

Did you ever wake up and know the moment your feet hit the floor it was going to be one of those days?  Your suspicions are confirmed the moment your assistant comes into your office with the comment, “You’re not going to believe this.”  She’s right.  You don’t.  How is it that  supposedly adult professionals can behave like a bunch of five year olds?  What didn’t they get the first time you talked with them?

Does this describe some of the moments you’ve had recently?  As we’ve discussed, when the parties involved don’t buy into the solution the problem may persist and worsen.  So now what do you do?  Look at the options you have.  Have you correctly identified all of them?  The range of options could help frame the approach you may want to take.  You can choose to ignore the issue and hope it goes away or – –

Today, we’re going to look at one extreme option.  Obviously, the quickest and harshest solution is to fire one, both or all of the players.  Before giving this option serious consideration you need to look at all the consequences, intended and unintended.  Are you acting out of frustration or in the best interests of your organization?  Can the organization afford to lose one or more of the individuals?  Do you have the personnel in place to immediately take over the duties and responsibilities?  Or will you have to go through the hiring process?  How will that affect productivity?  How will firing these individuals affect the morale of the specific work unit and the overall organization?  What message do you want to send?  What message will be received?  As you contemplate this extreme solution you can’t help thinking that the day can’t get any worse.  Want to bet?

A Progress Report

by

Looking back on the topics already discussed we’ve covered a lot of ground.  How can we possibly have anything more to talk about?  After reading the blogs and thinking about them, have all your problems disappeared?  Or is Aunt Nellie still on your case, along with the stockholders (if you have any) and your employees?  What about your family?  How much quality time has been spent with the family and why is that even important?

Maintaining a balance and focus is important if quality work is to be accomplished.  How well do you listen to a recitation of the same old problem when you’ve been working nose to the grindstone for weeks and months on end with no break?  Even your weekends have been consumed by work.  Can you really say that your perspective is as sharp as it was months ago when you took a few days off to recharge your batteries?  How sharp are your problem identification skills when you’re tired, stressed, and reaching critical mass?  Go take the vacation.  We’ll chat later.

Due Diligence in Problem Solving

by

Recently a friend asked if due diligence applied to problem solving.  The first question to ask is what exactly is due diligence.  According to the dictionary definition, due diligence is the “care that a reasonable person exercises to avoid harm to another person or their property.” [1]

Obviously due diligence is a technical term used most frequently in the legal and business professions.  But the question and information I gathered got me thinking whether due diligence actually applies to problem solving.  Here’s what I’ve concluded.

The legal definition indicates that due diligence reflects a high level of care, consideration, prudence, and/or judgment that an individual is reasonably expected to exercise in specific situations.  For example, when a business is considering a merger with or an outright acquisition of another corporation, the leaders are expected to conduct an intensive investigation prior to that merger or acquisition in order to protect the stockholders and the company’s original holdings.  There have been a number of news reports in recent years of mergers taking place where the information used to make the decision was later determined to be faulty.  Stockholders on the losing end of that decision have questioned whether or not the decision makers practiced due diligence.

This brings me to my original question.  Does due diligence apply to problem solving?  Yes.  When we think of due diligence as a process of acquiring reliable, accurate and objective information upon which to base an informed decision, due diligence is an extremely important part of the problem solving process.  A competent problem solver will engage in systematic research to gather critical facts and descriptive information which will enable the problem solver to present solutions that are realistic and practical.

When companies fail is it because leaders can’t lead? (PART III)

by

Companies that look good on paper but still fail may have a history of repeating mistakes.  Is it possible that these companies don’t follow through with their technological or market edge and fail to achieve success?  In sports such behavior is known as “choking.”  Have these companies “choked” at crucial moments?   Why?  The repetition of behaviors known to be unsuccessful may reflect an inability of  the leadership team to correctly identify the problem and implement realistic, practical solutions.  If a problem solver has been hired, does the leadership have the courage to implement the recommended programs to resolve the problems?  If not, why not?  Perhaps the failure of such companies is a result of “group think.”  Those in leadership positions and able to implement solutions don’t think through the long term and short term consequences of impractical solutions.  Instead, leadership sets a tone where everyone has to agree with the leader.  (Anyone remember the fable of the emperor’s new clothes?)  No one steps up and points out the flaws in the thinking or in the implementation of a bad solution.  This usually happens in work environments where creativity and independent thought are perceived as negative behaviors.

So now you’re the leader of a failing organization.  What approach are you going to take?  Will you have the confidence in yourself and the people around you to inspire creativity and independent thought?  Or will you simply demand that everyone march in lock step over the cliff like a bunch of lemmings?  If you haven’t done so already, do you have the confidence to hire a problem solver to help you resolve the issues blocking your organization’s progress toward real success and financial stability?  A collaborative approach to identifying and resolving the problems is certainly worth the effort if your organization is facing failure.  It can’t hurt and when Aunt Nellie calls again, refer her to the problem solver.  That should free you up to focus your energies on solving your organization’s problems once and for all.

When companies fail, is it because leaders can’t lead? (PART II)

by

What about the companies we see in the news (at least in the financial and business news) as they struggle to survive?  It’s not always about the money.  One thing leaders of companies on the brink of failure should look at is how well their company solves problems.  The first step is the correct identification of the problems.  If hiring large problem solving firms of consultants hasn’t stopped the bleeding, so to speak, perhaps the approach to problem solving needs to be reassessed.  Most large problem solving consulting firms do wonderful work but there may be times when they don’t achieve success, through no fault of their own.  Their lack of success in certain situations may result from how the consulting firm was introduced.   In the rush to solve the problems immediately, management may not  properly introduce  the problem solvers to company personnel.   The consulting firm is put behind the eight ball with no real chance for success.  If that happens, management should consider if a single problem solving consultant might achieve the opening of the lines of communication so that problem solving can begin.  Why would single “no-name” problem solvers have an advantage in such circumstances?    A single consultant could be introduced as a new member of management or the HR department, or whatever.  He or she can focus upon getting the problems identified correctly, communicate directly with the parties involved and not worry about any advance PR campaign which was put out by management.    There’s a time and place for large scale consulting organizations to become involved. In many situations such firms do a wonderful job of identifying problems and implementing realistic solutions. But when their efforts fail, leaders should consider the single practitioner approach before closing the doors.