Last month, I shared a very powerful time management tool which has proven to be very successful for those who have attended our time management seminars.

In that article, Start a “Stop-Doing” List, I explained that a “Stop-Doing” list is nothing more than a simple inventory of bad habits or negative actions currently practiced by an individual, team or organization that would provide better results if they were discontinued.

I pointed out in that article that our seminar break-out sessions have clearly demonstrated that everyone’s list is uniquely focused on their own daily routines. While some commonalities emerged from the exercise, most attendees produced examples that differed greatly from others in the session.

For that reason, I chose not to share examples. However, since the appearance of that article, I have received several requests for some examples. Therefore, I’d like to share a few of the more generic samples which have been generated in our “I Hate Time Management” seminars.

Hopefully, one or more of these examples will inspire you to create your own list customized to reflect your own personal daily routine.

“I’m going to stop hiring the first body that walks through the door simply because I’m short-handed.”
Experience has proven that it’s actually much more painful and expensive in the long run.

“I’m going to stop telling employees how to do their jobs.”
Far better that I tell them the results I want and expect, and let them figure out how to attain them. I’ll offer to coach them and provide them with support, but allow them to figure it out.

“I’m going to stop managing people.”
My job is not to manage people. My job is to provide a context within which people can manage themselves.

“I’m going to stop trying to change people.”
I’m going to focus instead on utilizing their existing assets.

“I’m going to stop thinking I have to know the answer.”
I’m going to focus on knowing how to find the answers or surround myself with those who have them or know how to find them.

“I’m going to stop sending employees to training of any kind without explicit expectations.”
I did exactly that after our last session and was embarrassingly shocked at the positive results.

“I’m going to stop treating others as I would like to be treated.”
I’m going to instead treat them as they would like to be treated.

“I’m going to stop doing just annual performance reviews.”
Monthly reviews have proven to be much more effective.

“I’m going to stop thinking of salaries and benefits as an expense.”
I’m going to consider them instead as investments and treat them as such.

“I’m going to stop enabling my staff and start empowering them.”
They’ll never grow until I allow them to do so.
 
Now create your own personal list of things YOU need to stop doing. Significant improvement will never come until we learn how to stop doing things and behaving in ways that are no longer effective. Now is the time to start!

Recommended Training Resource: Time Challenged follows Kent, a harried supervisor, as he joins a self-help group for time-challenged individuals, and learns skills to better use his time, including giving up tasks and meetings that aren’t absolutely vital to his top priorities. This program also now available as an e-learning course.

This must be one of the most feared phrases that a good recruiter can hear, unfortunately, it and phrases like it are not uncommon. A better name for it is “reckless hiring,” as such demands are essentially a directive to source candidates who are the real-world equivalent to Homer Simpson. While I certainly understand the pain a vacancy, particularly one in a highly visible role, can cause, such shortsightedness often ends up backfiring.

The cost of hiring a weak employee like Homer Simpson in many cases exceeds the cost of leaving the position vacant until you can get a top-quality hire. Superior recruiters rarely cave to pressure and find ways to talk managers out of this silly request. Following are some arguments that I have developed to respond to “butts in chairs” recruiting requests.

(Incidentally, the same arguments can also be applied to existing weak employees in cases where layoffs or terminations are being considered.)

The Top 30 Arguments against Hiring “Butts in Chairs” a.k.a. Warm Bodies, “C” Players and Homer Simpson

Business Impacts of Butts in Chairs

• Lost productivity — a new hire who produces in the bottom quarter of employees in a position can produce between 25% and 600% less than a top performer. The quality of their work may even be lower than the volume of their output.
• Reduced revenue — if the new hire happens to be in a revenue-generating or revenue-impact position, the loss of revenue could be significant.
• Lost innovation – in a fast-moving world, high rates of innovation are critical to maintaining competitive advantage. Organizations cannot tolerate employees who are resistant to change and whose work may actually distract other employees.
• Customer impacts — customers know when they are dealing with a weak employee, so hiring a subpar employee into a role that interfaces with customers can measurably reduce sales, customer satisfaction, and increase customer turnover.
• Error rates – poor performers make many mistakes generating work that must be redone. Weak employees may also cause more accidents, hurting themselves and others.
• Slower time-to-market — weak employees are slower in both their work and their thinking. As a result, they can slow the progress of the entire team, especially in important areas like product development.
• Competitive advantage – hiring weak employees sends a message to competitors that you are getting weak. This might encourage and empower them to become more competitive and confident.

Increased Management Time and Effort From Butts in Chairs Employees

• More management time — weak hires are “high maintenance” requiring more coaching and concern. The time spent on weak employees can’t be spent on the best employees or on business planning.
• Weak hires must be replaced — even though “warm bodies” may appear to help in the short-term, eventually (when their weak performance can no longer be tolerated), they will have to be replaced. Unfortunately, weak hires have little chance of getting poached, so if your organizations is averse to firing, they may stay with you forever.
• Performance management and termination costs — weak employees require frequent performance management, sucking up management/HR time and development resources. Unfortunately most statistics reveal that such efforts fail, so all invested resources are essentially lost.

The Hiring Manager’s Image Is Impacted

• Being branded as a “C” manager — it’s a well-known business axiom that weak managers routinely hire weak employees (C managers hire C players). Hiring weak employees will send a clear message to everyone in the organization validating that a manager has become a “C” manager.
• Loss of your colleagues’ respect — Once a manager makes the decision to go down the butts-in-chairs road, they will instantly lose the respect of other managers. This loss of respect may negatively impact their willingness to cooperate, to share ideas, as well as their responses to 360° reviews.
• Reduced bonuses — for managers who hire and retain a significant percentage of weak performers, performance bonus opportunities will be significantly reduced.
• Impacts on promoteability — hiring weak employees will be noticed by superiors, which coupled with poor business results will limit chances of promotion. It may also limit opportunities for jobs at other firms.

People-management and Team Impacts

• Resentment by co-workers — better-performing employees often resent being on the same team with “losers.” They may have to spend a significant portion of their time helping out or fixing the mistakes of weak employees, ultimately reducing their productivity.
• Lost leadership and promotional opportunities — every weak hire is a missed opportunity for building leadership bench strength. If your organization’s attrition rate is high, you may be faced with a situation where a long-tenured weak hire may by default eventually become a team leader. Over the long term your internal candidate pool for promotions will be dramatically reduced.
• Increased turnover — hiring and keeping weak employees may send a clear message to high-quality employees that standards are being reduced and performance is no longer important. This may cause them to transfer or to quit the organization altogether.
• Reduced internal transfers — as other employees learn of reduced standards through informal channels, the number of quality employees who will consider transferring into affected departments will drop like a stone.
• Opportunity costs — every slot taken up by a weak employee can’t be filled with a great employee. Without as many great employees as possible, you won’t have an effective team that produces superior results.
• Negative impacts on future hiring — when candidates meet and interact with weak employees, they may reconsider and pursue other opportunities.
• Legal issues increase — weak hires are much more likely to file formal complaints and grievances. In addition, they often require extensive discipline. If a lawsuit or government complaint results, the cost of making a bad hire will be significantly amplified.
• Hiring costs — it costs no more to hire a better performer. The salary costs of weak hires are not lower than average employees.
• Lost agility — if your organization operates in a fast-changing business environment, every team needs to have agile members. A weak hire cannot contribute to that competency and will slow down everyone else on the team.
• Longer ramp-up time — weak new hires will require more intense and time-consuming onboarding, taking longer for them to reach minimum levels of productivity if even possible. As their salary will not be reduced during this time, your ROI will.
• Reduced learning — other members of the team can’t learn anything positive from weak employees, thus reducing overall team learning speed. If weak employees do coach others, they may actually hurt their productivity by steering them in the wrong direction.
• A loss of competitive intelligence — new hires who come from direct competitors can provide you with intelligence and best practices. Unfortunately, any “hurry-up” hiring is unlikely to capture even a single employee from your best competitors.
• Lower technology competence — candidates with the most technology experience and skills are difficult to land. As a result, a butts-in-chairs approach will likely yield fewer candidates with advanced technology skills and experience.
• More training is required — throughout their lifecycle, weak hires will require more access to training and retraining, which in addition to their lower levels of productivity may result in them costing more than they produce.
• A loss of diversity — rapid hiring of any kind without sufficient pre-work almost always results in lower-quality candidates. If you expect to hire diverse candidates, expect any “butts-in-chairs” approach to have a well-below-average yield in this area.
• More temporaries required — weak employees are more prone to absenteeism and tardiness, which will require more use of costly temporary workers to fill in.

Final Thoughts
Although it’s quite common for individual shortsighted managers to request that you stoop to a “butts-in-chairs” level, resist such demands. If momentary drops in standards catch on, it could decimate the organization. While not a scientific study, most informal assessments peg the cost of a bad hire to be 150-300% of their annual salary each year they remain employed. Professional recruiters have both a professional and fiduciary responsibility to their organization’s shareholders to ensure that new hires not only perform but also have the capability of continuous learning and eventual promotion. For external recruiters, the battle is even more difficult, but it still must be won unless they are willing to permanently damage their reputation.

Almost all “butts-in-chairs” hiring can be attributed to a failure to plan ahead. Forecasting hiring needs, developing candidate pools, and building candidate relationships are tried and true approaches that can prevent reckless hiring. If you are ever forced into a “butts-in-chairs” mode, it is essential that you use a “quality of hire” measure so that next time you a request, you will have supporting data demonstrating the dollar cost of the damage done by use this approach.

About the Author: Dr. John Sullivan is a well-known thought leader in HR. He is a frequent speaker and advisor to Fortune 500 and Silicon Valley firms. Formerly the chief talent officer for Agilent Technologies (the 43,000-employee HP spin-off), he is now a professor of management at San Francisco State University. More recruiting articles by Dr. Sullivan can be found in the ER Daily archives. Information about his numerous other articles, books and manuals about recruiting and HR can be found online.

Reprinted with permission of ERE Media.

Recommended Training Resource: Actions Speak The latest on behavior-based interviewing from thought leader, Dr. Paul Green. Content and examples are presented in an entertaining style perfect for a new generation of interviewers!

By Katherine Crowley and Kathi Elster

Most studies of different generations and how they behave at work focus on each generation’s values based on the cultural context of their upbringing.  We know that Gen Y employees are considered tech savvy, accustomed to positive reinforcement, and committed to work/life balance.  Gen X workers are presumably more independent, self-sufficient, and resourceful. Boomers equate work and position with self-worth, so they’re viewed as achievement-oriented, dedicated and career-focused. Finally, the over-65 Silent Generation is known to be hardworking, loyal, and technologically challenged.

While cultural context is extremely valuable, we think it’s important to approach the multi-generational workforce from a slightly different perspective.  We want to consider how one’s behavior at work is driven by more than cultural context and upbringing. In our view, each generation is also at a specific stage of psychological development.

This means that in addition to the economic, political and cultural influences of their upbringing, each generation is operating within a specific stage of their adult life.  And that psychological stage informs the employee’s needs, capabilities and limitations.  

Why is this important? Because, while you can see how a Boomer is frustrated with a Gen Y’s idealistic views of what technology can do, it may not be as clear that this Gen Y employee has the same idealism that her Boomer colleague once possessed when he or she was the same age.  Not true, you say? Think again. Research by Dr. Jean Twenge, professor of Psychology at San Diego State University proved that current claims that Gen Y adults are more idealistic than their Gen X or Boomer predecessors were at the same stage in life is false. 

This is because we all move through and experience the same stages of psychological development as adults.  Consider this example:

While leading a staff development retreat for a hospice organization, it became obvious that several Gen Y employees were feeling misunderstood and disrespected by their Gen X CFO.  These junior employees sat together in a group, with a look of fear on their faces, arms and legs crossed. The Boomers in the room could not understand what was happening. They did not take the CFO’s moody and dismissive behavior personally.  The Boomers (who included the CEO and VP of Patient Services) respected the CFO’s ability to repeatedly deliver excellent results.

From a developmental perspective, each group of employees at this retreat displayed age-appropriate behavior. The Gen Y’s were exhibiting responses typical of their stage in life: they were naturally self-conscious, peer-oriented, and unsure of themselves.  The Boomers were also reacting In a manner consistent with their stage in life: confident in their experience, able to take other people with a grain of salt, and appreciative of a job well done. Finally, the Gen X CFO, who’d been targeted as the problem, was simply doing what came naturally at her stage in life: Laying down the law, setting her standards, and expecting everyone around her to comply.

And therein lies the challenge:  A multi-generational workforce, where each player is operating from a specific stage in his or her adult development.

Awareness of these internal differences at each phase of adult life is the first step to managing all four generations (Gen Y, Gen X, Boomers and The Silent Generation) effectively.  There is no one-size-fits-all management strategy when dealing with such an age-diverse workforce.  Each generation needs to be managed based on their psychological needs and capabilities.  This can make the job of a manager quite complicated.

So here’s a sampling of what each developmental stage looks like:

Generation Y              Ages: late teens to late twenties

How they define themselves: “I am my relationships.”
Greatest focus: Peer relationships – being accepted and affiliated with friends and co-workers of a similar age.

New to the workforce, these individuals are idealistic and energetic. Although they may seem confident and entitled on the outside, inside they are unsure of themselves and very fearful of committing to the wrong career path.

Management needs: To try-out different jobs, and receive help with prioritizing.

Generation X            Ages: Early thirties to mid forties

How they define themselves: “I am my internal government.”

Greatest focus: Establishing a professional identity. Living by personal rules regarding career, family, community.

Having identified their chosen field or profession, they seek to make a mark and achieve results in the areas that matter to them.

Management needs: To be supported in achieving goals, obtaining credentials, and attaining work/life balance.

Baby Boomers                    Ages: Late forties to early sixties

How they define themselves:  “I am my experiences.” 

Greatest focus: Feeling a sense of mastery (and reward) in chosen field while incorporating a better quality of life.

Aware of the fact that they’re on the tail end of a career track, these individuals want to be recognized and rewarded for their hard-earned expertise.

Management needs: To be encouraged to showcase and share expertise; to continue learning new skills.

Silent Generation                   Ages: Mid-sixties to retirement

How they define themselves: “I am part of a larger whole.”

Greatest focus: Desire to establish legacy at work; interest in planning for retirement years.

Phasing out of formal work roles, these individuals focus on quality of life and doing the things they’ve always wanted to do.

Management needs: Allow flex-time and reduced schedule. Encourage documentation of institutional memory.

From this sampling of the generational orientations, we can point to some specific ways that management can help each generation work well with the others.

• If Boomers want to be appreciated for their expertise, is there a way that they can mentor Gen X and Gen Y employees – helping them figure out their career paths and establish their professional identities? 
• If Gen X’ers need to establish their credentials, can they use the idealism of Gen Y employees to accomplish their goals while being sensitive to this younger generation’s insecurity and need for reassurance? 
• If Gen Y employees have high ideals and technological savvy, can they appreciate the fact that their veteran colleagues need to be respected for their experience in order to follow their lead? 
• And what about the Silent Generation? Can their historical perspective and wealth of knowledge be documented so that it becomes part of the institutional memory of any organization?

The challenge of blending generations at work is not new. Our current workforce has one important difference: The youngest generation has the greatest facility with technology, and the older generations depend on that acuity for their organization’s growth. This dependence on the youngest generation to bring each company into the future has changed the balance of power in a way that is disconcerting for Gen X, Boomer and Silent Generation employees who’ve earned their experience the hard way.

With a greater understanding of each generation’s capabilities, needs and internal workings, you can lead the way in creating a workforce where the four generations grow more tolerant of each other’s differences while capitalizing on each other’s strengths.

About the Authors:  Kathi Elster and Katherine Crowley are authors of the books Working With You is Killing Me, and Working For You Isn’t Working For Me. Used with permission. Visit their website: http://www.ksquaredenterprises.com/

Recommended Training Resource:  While focused primarily on cultural influences, Please Respect My Generation! is a great program for sparking discussion on how people of varying ages can work best together.

Anyone with decision-making authority needs relevant, timely, and accurate information that can be acted upon – the right information at the right time.   

But how do you identify the measurements that matter most? According to the Data Warehousing Institute*, an effective measure should:

• Monitor critical business processes or activities…by using metrics of business performance that trigger alerts when potential problems arise.

• Analyze the root cause of problems that surface…by exploring relevant and timely information from multiple perspectives at various levels of detail.

• Effectively manage people and processes…by improving decisions, optimizing performance, and steering the organization (or department) in the right direction.

Brainstorm with your team potential organizational/team/performance measurements that meet these standards. Be sure to discuss how important each is to the success of the organization (or department) and then cull the list down to 5-7 important indicators.

For these indicators, break into smaller groups and have each group complete the following for 1-2 of the indicators:

• What specific information needs to be gathered? By whom?
• How will it be gathered?
• Where will it come from?
• How often can it be gathered?
• How often should it be shared/communicated?
• Who should communicate the information and with whom should it be shared?
• Are there any obstacles to gathering or using this information?

*Study referenced in Performance Dashboards: Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Your Business by Wayne W. Eckerson, Wiley (2005), page 27.

Excerpted from the Leader’s Guide to the video program The Dashboard. ©2006 Franklin Covey.

Training Resource:  When searching for ways to measure effectiveness and build success, today’s organizations have access to vast amounts of data. The Dashboard will teach your staff what information is truly meaningful, and how to get it quickly in the hands of those who can act on it.

Planning for every eventuality is one of the leadership factors taught at West Point. While it might sound contradictory, the best planning allows the greatest flexibility. No plan survives contact with the “enemy”— whatever form the “enemy” takes — be it time, budgets, competitors, or changing conditions. Planning for all contingencies establishes the competitive edge.

Communication and planning go hand in hand. A plan is only as good as the leader’s ability to communicate it to the team, and to receive information from the team as to whether or not things are going according to plan.

Also, learning from Failure is a key skill that must be understood and mastered by the cadets at West Point. A strong leader understands and uses the value of mistakes as a learning tool. He or she manages failure not by running from it or avoiding it, but by chasing problems and seeing how they can contribute to future success.

Activity Instructions:

The first part of the activity should be completed individually. The second part is a group activity. Tell participants they will have 15 minutes to complete the individual and group activities on the Worksheets. Ask them to choose a discussion leader for the group activity part of the Exercise.

At the 8-minute mark, suggest to the groups that they move into their group discussions.

Debrief the Activity (10 minutes)

Ask for volunteers to share any insights gained on the questions they reviewed individually. Prompt one or more participants to share how one or the other of the skill points makes a tangible difference in their department or organization.

For the group activities:

Ask one of the groups to discuss the relationship between Planning and Failure:

• How do they depend on each other?

• Is it possible to discuss one without the other?

• How do they connect in this organization’s environment?

Ask one of the working groups to share their ideas for a learning experience focused on Planning or Failure. If time permits, ask one of the other groups to share one of their ideas for a development experience on the other skill factor.

ASK:

When you think about it, discussing a failure with peers and subordinates is extremely difficult for any of us to do. Have any of you had experiences where discussing a failure has provided noticeable benefits to yourself or to the organization?

Worksheet: Planning & Learning from Failure

On Your Own

As a Group

Work together in your group to complete the following activities.

Excerpted from the Leader’s Guide to the video program Leaders of Character: Leadership - the West Point Way

Training Resource: At the US Military Academy at West Point, cadets are taught to lead with honor and character. Leaders of Character: Leadership - the West Point Way documents how it’s done and visits the workplaces of West Point grads who now apply these skills in the public and private sectors.

What is Workplace Bullying?

In many ways, it is similar to playground bullying; except that as adults it should no longer be an issue. It is aggressive behavior that should be personally contained, but for some reason is not. Bullying involves more than one incident of aggressive negative behavior. It is a repeated pattern of negative behavior that usually involves a bully with more power or the convincing appearance of more power. Bullying can include acts that are intimidating, humiliating, and isolating and can be verbal or physical, blatant or subtle, active or passive. (Lutgen-Sandvik, 2006.)

The underlying message is that the bully can and will keep engaging in unwanted, negative behavior which you are powerless to stop. This sense of powerlessness grows and the target begins to feel bad about himself or herself, as well as frightened of the bully. Bullying appears to go on in an environment that tolerates or rewards hostile behavior without intervening.  The effect on the “target” of bullying can be devastating, and there is substantial research which shows that targets can experience a wide range of related illnesses, from depression and loss of sleep to intestinal disorders and increased risk of heart disease. Productivity drops, teamwork suffers, good employees leave, and employers have increased medical and legal claims. (Yamada, 2008.) Research even shows that workplace bullying has a more negative effect on employees than sexual harassment, perhaps because there are more procedures in place for dealing with sexual harassment nowadays. (Bryner, 2008)

Who Are the Bullies at Work?

From my experience and interdisciplinary training, I strongly believe that bullies at work are High Conflict People (“HCPs”) with high conflict personalities.  By this I mean that they bring this behavior with them, rather than that they are reacting to an external “issue” or that other people “make” them behave this way. I believe that bullying is part of “who they are”—their life-long pattern of thinking, feeling and behaving. This began before they took this job.

From my observations, there are four personality types most often engaged in workplace bullying. Each of these types is trying to overcome a sense of weakness or fear in themselves, although they are usually not aware of this.  (And don’t try to point it out to them!) They are unconsciously driven to find and attack what I call their “Targets of Blame,” because this helps them briefly feel less anxious and helpless themselves by feeling able to hurt others. Their targets can be anyone. It’s not personal. It’s about the bully, not about the target.

“I’m Very Superior” type: These bullies are stuck trying to prove to themselves and others that they are superior beings. They are really afraid of being seen as inferior, but this fear is not conscious and they will become very defensive if you suggest that they are worried about being seen as inferior. They show frequent disdain and disrespect towards those closest to them. This is mostly verbal, but they may engage in humiliating jokes, tricks or maneuvers to make you look bad (to make them look good, they hope). This is automatic behavior for them.

“Love-You, Hate-You” type: These bullies often seek revenge for perceived rejections from those they thought were very good friends. Once their fantasy of friendship fades, they retaliate. Even if you did nothing, they don’t check out misinformation—instead they act on it. They may spread rumors and make claims that you are an extremely uncaring or unethical person. If there was a conflict, they want others to believe it’s all your fault. They have a lot of all-or-nothing thinking and they jump to conclusions. “You’re with me or you’re against me.” They can easily fly into a rage, and sometimes they become violent or stalk their Targets.

“I Need to Dominate” type: These bullies go beyond just wanting to appear superior. They enjoy hurting other people. They fear being dominated, so they try to find someone, somewhere, who they can dominate. As long as they are harming someone else, they feel less vulnerable. They may say hurtful things, but they often do hurtful things, including stealing from those they are closest to, manipulating you into doing favors and then stabbing you in the back, and being willing to destroy your career for some short-term goal. You may feel that you are being manipulated or in danger. Be skeptical of strange schemes. They are con artists.

“I Can’t Trust Anyone” type:  These bullies are highly suspicious of others and may believe that you are taking advantage of them, when you don’t even know them personally. They bear a grudge and will attack you before (they think) you are going to attack them. They can spread rumors that you want to harm them, and they believe it themselves. They often create high conflict situations because of their excessive fears of everyone else.

All of these bullies feel that they are victims. They think that you are a danger to them, and so they believe they are justified in attacking you. While it may seem that they are enjoying bullying others, it is not true enjoyment. They enjoy the momentary feeling of being in power. Most people don’t need to have power over someone else in a negative way. But for these bullies, that is the only satisfaction in a daily struggle of feeling that they are everyone else’s victim. Remember, this feeling is not conscious and you will make it worse if you suggest this to them.

Are Bullies Increasing at Work?

Over the past couple decades, workplace bullying has begun to receive the same kind of attention that schoolyard bullying has received for years. Perhaps it’s the same dynamics, for people whose personality development has been stuck since childhood. Interestingly, research indicates that 16 to 21 percent of employees experience health-endangering bullying and that it’s four times greater than sexual harassment reports. (Yamada, 2008)

These statistics (16 to 21 percent) are very similar to the statistics for personality disorders in society (approximately 15-17%). Since bullies also have enduring patterns of dysfunctional behavior, many of them may have personality disorders. Research on family violence shows a strong correlation between ongoing domestic abuse and personality disorders. (Dutton, 2007)

It’s also interesting that the growth of this problem in the workplace seems to have paralleled the increase in personality disorders in our modern society. They can’t seem to stop themselves and many organizations seem to tolerate them. With the increase in self-centeredness and decrease in empathy, we can expect to see more of this problem in the future.

What Can You Do?

If you are being bullied, there are several things to consider.

1. Don’t take it personally. Avoid becoming self-critical or becoming isolated. Bullying behavior is about the bully, not the target. There is nothing you could have done to deserve this behavior.
2. Get help. Talk to someone about the bullying, even if it’s a friend, family member or co-worker. Start where it’s easiest to start. You will feel stronger, rather than weaker. Don’t try to stop the bully alone. That is a mistake many individuals make and many organizations make.
3. Find out your organization’s policy about bullying. There may be a resource person to whom you can report the bullying, such as in Human Resources or an Employee Assistance Person. The best policies encourage co-workers and managers to work together to halt bullying behavior and to have the bully removed, if necessary. If you are being bullied by your immediate supervisor and if your organization says you have to talk to that person, look around for someone else to talk to. Such a policy is disfavored and there may be someone else in your organization who you can speak to.
4. Remember you have choices. Many excellent employees leave organizations which allow bullies to run rampant. You don’t have to tolerate a hostile work environment. Knowing you have choices and investigating your options (like researching other job options) will give you strength. Remember, bullying is not about you. It’s about the bully and the bully’s personality problems. You don’t have to be stuck. Perhaps a change of departments or supervisors may be a solution, so that you don’t have to leave the organization. But don’t get stuck feeling stuck.

What Can Your Organization Do?

To be honest, the problem is really a cultural problem. The workplace culture must reject bullying, as there is little the individual worker can do. Successful programs aimed at reducing playground bullying focus on the school environment. Likewise, workplace bullying needs to be addressed at the organizational level. Here are a few suggestions for a comprehensive approach:

1. Policies Against Bullying: Leadership in the workplace must establish clear policies against bullying and for healthy conflict resolution. Clarifying that bullying is unwanted, aggressive, negative behavior of any type will help employees begin to understand where to draw the lines. Clarifying what the consequences are of workplace bullying (and that the organization will enforce them) can go a long way to helping employees feel safe. Employees as a group should know what the policies are, as bullies often distort their understanding of the rules to allow their inappropriate behavior.
2. Prevention of Bullying: Programs designed to reduce school bullying often have a committee of representatives from different parts of the school community. This committee then develops and disseminates prevention activities. By involving all levels of employees and management, such a team approach has a better chance of changing an organizational culture than simply a top down initiative. However, top management has to strongly support it in a meaningful way, or it will fail.
3. Staff Training: Training all workers to support each other and “set limits” on their co-workers may be more effective than just setting company policies. (Bryner, 2008) When all workers feel responsible for the quality of the workplace environment, it seems to calm down aggressive employees. In contrast, when workers feel that “anything goes” or “it’s not my problem,” there is more likely to be aggressive, bullying behavior. Practicing conflict scenarios and what co-workers can say and do is a particularly useful approach.
4. Confidential Lines of Communication: Many bullies are in positions of authority over their targets. Therefore, lines of communication which require reporting such problems to one’s immediate superior do not work. There needs to be independent resource people for reporting bullying to the organization and to the leadership.
5. Counseling: It would help employees and organizations to have a resource person for bullied individuals to use to discuss bullying experiences in confidence. This may help employees and organizations reduce the downward spiral of self-doubt and health problems that bullying often triggers. Such a service could be of assistance to bullies as well, so that the organization may be able to keep some of these employees while assisting them in improving their workplace behavior.
6. Consequences: There have to be real consequences for bullies, which everyone can see. That way other potential bullies will be more careful to follow the rules and other potential victims will know that they work where they will be protected.
7. Healthy Workplace Laws: Some states and countries are considering healthy workplace legislation which would establish expectations for employee behavior, and also provide for legal redress for workplace bullying. This should be encouraged, because it must be part of the culture, not up to the individual victim to deal with.

In summary, bullying appears to be a growing problem. Individual targets are usually overwhelmed, especially because bullies appear to have the active or passive support of their employers. Therefore, a comprehensive approach may have the best chance of success for a company or organization attempting to address this problem. Understanding that bullying is primarily an unconscious behavior based on long-term personality patterns may assist organizations and individuals in approaching this more effectively.

Most workplace bullies may be High Conflict People (HCPs) with high conflict personalities. Realizing this helps understand that the problem is:

• A problem of long duration that won’t just go away.
• It is a deep and serious problem, rather than a minor problem.
• It is a problem that must be solved at the community level, rather than putting the burden on the individual target to stop the HCP.

Best wishes in handling this problem. Remember, you are not alone and you don’t need to take any bullying personally. It is not about you—it’s about the bully’s pattern of behavior, and everyone’s willingness to set limits on it.
 

About the Author, Bill Eddy:
High Conflict Institute provides training and consultations regarding High Conflict People (HCPs) to professionals dealing with legal, workplace, educational, and healthcare disputes. Bill Eddy is the President of the High Conflict Institute and the author of “It’s All Your Fault!”.  He is an attorney, mediator, and therapist. Bill has presented seminars to attorneys, judges, mediators, ombudspersons, human resource professionals, employee assistance professionals, managers, and administrators in 25 states, several provinces in Canada, France, and Australia. For more information about High Conflict Institute, our seminars and consultations, or Bill Eddy and his books go to: www.HighConflictInstitute.com or call 602-606-7628.

Training Resource: Harassment: A New Look will help employees recognize and avoid new forms of harassment not necessarily covered by law, such as bullying, cyber-bullying, “sexting”, intimidation, and more.

There is a better way to handle disciplinary issues, based on the organization’s need for top-level performance by all employees. When discipline is approached in a logical, positive framework, focused on bringing performance up to par, the emotion can be taken out of the equation and real improvement can be made. Every workplace is different, but the relationships between employees and their supervisors, and between employees and the organization as a whole, are based on a fundamental requirement: wages are traded for performance. When performance is not up to standards, it is the manager’s job to work with the employee to bring them back up to the required level.

Traditionally, we have focused on punishment as the most direct way to deal with performance problems. But this approach can backfire when applied to adults on the job, because it can be humiliating to the employee. And, if it is humiliating, the manager’s actions will lead to anger, resentment, and reduced performance – not the improvement they were hoping for. Every disciplinary action is different because you are working with unique individuals who have life experiences, expectations, and emotional needs you know nothing about. Managers need a process that allows for these circumstances, and for the employee involved to play a key role in the resolution of the problem. You also need a process that focuses on the issues, not the personalities involved.

The first step in a disciplinary process – and the only one this article deals with – is identifying the performance gap. By focusing on the gap between expected behavior and actual behavior, supervisors can take an objective approach to the problem, leaving the subjective and personal issues out of it. Emotional responses to employee problems cloud the issue and inhibit reaching the true goal: improved performance.

Activity: Identifying the Performance Problem

The most important part of identifying and understanding a performance problem is separating the facts from your judgments and opinions.

Listen to the difference in these two ways of describing the same problem:

• You are expected to complete and submit your daily production reports before leaving for the day.
• You’ve caused a lot of screw-ups on the second shift because of your lazy attitude toward production paperwork.

What is the difference between these statements?
• The first approach deals with the facts – behaviors that are observable.
• The second statement is loaded with judgment and opinion – subjective statements that attack the person, rather than focusing on the problem.

Looking at this situation, why might these production reports be important?
• They may affect other shifts, customer deliveries, the ordering of new parts, or other downstream processes.

So what is the real purpose of discipline in this situation?

Look for the following answer:
• To improve performance!

The purpose of employee discipline is to close the performance gap between what you need the employee to do and what they are actually doing.  Let’s see how we can apply this to our own employee disciplinary problems.

REFER to the Worksheet. Participants will work individually on this activity.
(Allow 3-4 minutes)

SAY:
The best way to identify an employee performance problem is by comparing the desired performance with the employee’s actual performance – what you expect versus what you’re actually getting.

Think about a current disciplinary problem in your department and the employee associated with it (no names please!).

• Describe the performance problem in section 1.
• List a few bullets or key words that describe what you expect from the employee in the left column of section 2.
• List what the employee is actually doing in the right column of section 2. In effect, you are performing a gap analysis.
• Think about the situation objectively when you fill in section 3. If the employee is not aware of the problem, you need to understand why. If you haven’t set expectations properly, your meeting shouldn’t be about discipline, it should instead be about making your performance expectations clear and then monitoring the results.

DISCUSSION
Go around the room, asking for examples of the participant’s disciplinary incidents.

WORKSHEET

Excerpted from the Leader’s Guide to the CRM Learning video program, Positive Discipline.

Training Resource: Positive Discipline.Users are consistently thrilled with this program’s ability to help managers overcome their reluctance to addressing performance gaps, engage in productive performance discussions and end up with positive outcomes.

“I’m no good at selling!” Have you ever heard someone say that? Or maybe said it yourself? (Now, tell the truth.)

We hear it all the time. Everyone who is not in sales thinks, “I could never sell” — and most people who are in sales secretly think the same thing.

There is a reason people feel this way: most of us look at sales backwards. Backwards how? In the most fundamental ways.

For example.

They see sales as convincing people to do something they don’t want to do. It’s not: it is about learning what people do want to do and then helping them do that.

They think sales is about taking advantage of others. Not so: in fact, it’s about giving others more advantage.

Most people think of sales as a talking business. Nope: it’s really a listening business.

Classic sales training focuses on the “close.” The true sales greats hardly notice the close — they are too busy focusing on the open.

But the biggest inversion of all, the great upside-down misconception about sales, is that it is an effort to get other people to do something. Ask most anyone to define sales and you will hear some variation of this: “Sales is getting people to buy something.”

The truth about sales is that it isn’t about getting at all. Sales at its best, at its most effective, is precisely the opposite: it is about — get ready for this — giving.

The word “sales” itself suggests this. It is derived from the Old English word sellan, which means, you guessed it, “to give.” Selling is giving: giving time, attention, counsel, education, empathy and value.

Of course, this is not how most of us have learned to think about sales. The traditional approach to sales aims to choreograph the process by putting control firmly in the hands of the salesperson. Which is probably why neither party really enjoys it. It’s not much fun to have someone try to control you. For that matter, it’s not much fun to be the one doing the controlling, either.

The problem is that little word, “control.” You can’t do it.

Nobody can.

The classic sales process succeeds if you “make a sale.” But you can’t make a sale. Again, no one can. It’s impossible to make a sale, because no one can truly make other people do what they want them to do.

What you can do is create a context that allows a sale to happen when the other person makes a purchase. This is not semantics: this is the secret of all great salespeople.

When you spend time with a genuinely successful salesperson, pay close attention and you’ll find something surprising: none of the hundreds of standard sales techniques are what makes them excel at what they do.

Genuinely great salespeople are not great because they have mastered “the close,” or because they give a dazzling presentation, or because they could shoot holes in any customer objection from fifty paces. They are great because they create a vast and spreading sphere of good will wherever they go. They enrich, enhance and add value to people’s lives.

They make people happier.

How do they do that? What is it that makes them great?

What makes a great salesperson great at sales is that he or she is wholeheartedly interested in the other person. The truth about selling is that it’s not about your product, and it’s not about you — it’s about the other person.

The remarkable thing about these consummate salespeople is that they are not as rare as you might think. In fact, you can find them everywhere. This is because being adept at sales does not require mastery of complex or elaborate skills.

The laws that govern good salesmanship are the laws that govern good relationships. Selling is not at its core a business transaction; it is first and foremost the forging of a human connection.

This is very good news, because it means that anyone can be great in sales.

It means you can be great in sales.

You might think that to do so, you need to have an outgoing, naturally jovial, gregarious personality. Not true. Shy people create relationships and get married. Introverts make great friends. You don’t need to be a “people person,” or any specific type of person, to be great at selling. In fact, the idea itself — that you might have to be a certain sort of person to be great in sales — precisely misses the point:

It’s not about you; it’s about them.

If you take away nothing from this post but those seven words, it will have been well worth the time to read it — because your life in sales will transform.

# # #

*Bob Burg and John David Mann are coauthors of the national bestseller The Go-Giver and its companion volume Go-Givers Sell More (www.thegogiver.com).

Training Resource:  Top performers in all areas of work and life typically have a good sense of who they are and how to relate to others. CRM’s Emotional Intelligence program shows how competencies like self-awareness, self-motivation, self-control, empathy and relationship-building can be developed.

The best leaders train and empower their team so others can step up and move projects ahead without hesitation in the leader’s absence. Here is a case study that can help leaders and managers think through the preparation, training and delegation necessary to be away from the office, using a very realistic scenario.

Explain that the participants are going to explore a case study in order to help them review the skills needed to plan for delegation. First, though, split the class into two groups (or let them self-select a group): Delegators and Delegatees.

Either aloud or individually, have everyone read the Case Study (see below). After everyone has read the Case Study, lead a discussion among the Delegator group on the following questions:

• What portions of the General Manager’s responsibilities can he delegate, and what portions should he “shelve” until his return?
• What skills are necessary to perform the delegated tasks?
• Among the General Manager’s staff, who might be a candidate for delegation? Why?
• What kind of support will the General Manager need to provide?

Now, ask members of the Delegatee group to imagine they are the Dining Room Manager. Then lead a discussion on the following questions:

• What portions of the General Manager’s responsibilities can he delegate to you, and what portions should he “shelve” until his return?
• What skills will you need to be able to perform those tasks?
• What would you gain from accepting these delegated tasks?
• What demands will be placed on you?
• What kind of support will you need from the General Manager? From other staff members?

Bring the whole group back together and ask:
• What did this case study bring to light for you?
• How will you plan and delegate differently the next time you will be traveling for work or on vacation?
• Would your employees know what to do if you were unexpectedly out sick tomorrow?
• How can you communicate ‘who is empowered to do what’ in your absence?

Case Study
In a medium-sized restaurant specializing in high-end seafood cuisine, the General Manager is responsible for all marketing, advertising, inventory, hiring, training, budget management and controls, reservation and private party booking, and security, among a variety of additional day-to-day tasks such as discipline, crisis management, and maintenance. Inventory and budget reports are due monthly, and the other responsibilities are ongoing, and constant. Working for the General Manager are:

• A Chef
• A Sous Chef (Assistant Chef)
• 12 cooks and prep-cooks
• A Dining Room Manager
• A Bar Manager
• A 25-member service staff that includes hosts, servers, bussing help and bartenders.

The Dining Room Manager has several years of experience, but has only been with the restaurant for three months. A new bartender has also just come onboard. She was a Bar Manager in her former job, but since there wasn’t currently a manager position available here, she accepted a bartender position. The Chef is creative, hard working, and an excellent cook, but inexperienced as a manager, and has recently lost two frustrated employees.

The General Manager has just received 2 calls: the first from a VIP client requesting that the restaurant host a private party for his company, with 250 guests and a budget of $20,000, to be held four days from now. The second call informed the General Manager of a serious illness in the family, and he will need to leave immediately for at least a week.

Excerpted from the Leader’s Guide to the CRM Learning training program Delegating for Diehards.

Training Resource: Everest. See how a blind man’s quest to reach the summit was only possible through leadership and teamwork. When the climb leader had to drop out halfway up due to illness, you’ll learn how the other members of the team stepped up and made the climb a success.

Expectation Defined

In 1929, most banks in the USA were solvent. But their customers believed that they weren’t. The customers expected to lose their deposits. They rushed to withdraw them. The banks couldn’t meet the sudden demand. They became insolvent. Expectation created action. As George Bernard Shaw said, “The difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves. It’s how she’s treated.” Today we say, “Be careful, you might end up getting what you expect.” That’s exactly what bank customers got in 1929!

Hope and Expectation

“Hope” is not expectation. “Hope” describes what you’d “like to happen”. We often confuse the two. To say that you “hope my staff will treat customers well” is a statement of preference: what you want to happen. To say that “I expect my staff to meet our customer service standards at all times” is a statement of intent: what you believe will happen … provided, of course, that you have specified standards.

First Steps

You have to know exactly what you expect from your people. You need to express your expectations precisely. “To do a good job” is a four word slogan. That’s all it is. Include detail, precision and clarity when expressing your expectations.

Effect On Staff

When you tell employees what you expect, clearly and unequivocally, you are setting performance standards for your people. When they know exactly what you expect, you’re far more likely to get what you want from them. When they don’t, they’ll guess. You’ll get what they think you want. In extreme cases, you’ll get what they want.

Effect On You, The Manager

To get what you expect from your people, you must provide the resources they need. You can tell your people that you expect them to be at work on time. But if your starting time doesn’t match public transport timetables and there’s no parking within a reasonable distance of your business, your employees will know that you don’t really expect them to be on time.

Monitoring and Measuring

Set the standards. Provide the resources. Then monitor and measure. You can have precise expectations, excellent standards and superb resources. Measurement will turn these expectations into reality. If your employees know that their performance won’t be monitored and measured against previously stated standards, they’ll also know that you’re not serious about expecting superior performance.

Staff Treatment

Managers who genuinely expect their staff to perform well consistently treat them as if they are successful. They do everything they can to ensure staff will be successful. To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, “If you treat your staff like idiots, they’ll behave like idiots.” If you’re “on their backs” all the time, looking for errors, they’ll make errors for you to find because they know you expect them.

Conclusion

Are you a Freddy who treated Eliza like a lady? Or are you Professor Higgins who still saw her as a flower girl? Set standards. Tell your people. Provide the resources. Measure the performance. Use praise and encouragement effectively. Make it clear that you really want them to be the best. Lead by example. You may not quite reach the heights of success of “My Fair Lady”. But you will have a hit on your hands.

About the Author:  Leon Noone helps managers in small-medium business to improve on-job staff performance without training courses. Some say his ideas are too unconventional. Find out for yourself by reading his free Special Report “49 Practical Tips for Removing Employee Apathy, Aggravation And Resistance In Your Business.”

Simply visit http://managingemployeeperformance.com/ and download your free copy now.

Training Resource: People rise to the expectations others have for them. The Pygmalion Effect training program shows managers the four ways expectations are transmitted to subordinates and inspires them to raise performance by raising expectations.