How Bosses Undermine Themselves | Playing Hashtag With Jimmy Fallon

The game changes when we become the boss. Whether we know it or not, our employees are always watching and judging. Too often we’re unaware of how we come across to them and how they brand us. 

Bosses create the culture of the workplace. Their behavior influences the behavior of others positively or negatively. 

It’s human nature for employees to draw conclusions about who they think their bosses really are by assessing their quirks, idiosyncrasies, and behavior patterns— the windows into the person behind the title.  

The hashtag game 

Comedian Jimmy Fallon, former Saturday Night Live writer and performer, is the host of the talk show, Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. Each week he invites his viewers to play the hashtag game. This week he announced it on his show and then tweeted: 

@jimmyfallon Let’s play the hashtag game! Tweet out something weird about your current or former boss & tag with #mybossisweird. Could be on our show! 

Not every boss is weird but each of them (us) is likely to have behaviors that might annoy, shock, or disturb employees. Prevailing peculiarities start to become part of our brands until they become perceptions we can’t shake. When that happens, our career trajectory can be affected. 

Here are a few of the #mybossisweird tweets from Jimmy Fallon’s game. Each reveals deeper career implications, as I see them.  Please add yours.  

@potatobi #mybossisweird my boss has no idea what twitter is but he found out his competitors had it so I had to make a fake account and follow them 

This boss looks to be out-of-touch, disinterested in new technology, prone to shortcuts, and more interested in appearance than substance. If this is his/her approach to every new innovation in the marketplace, s/he’s in trouble. 

@loolyloo77 #mybossisweird calling me on my annual leave because she wants some info for the urgent report she forgot to submit weeks ago!

@JessicaJourney A former boss once sought me out in the restroom to ask me about progress on a work project. #mybossisweird 

Both of these bosses seem to suffer from panic, that feeling that s/he has to have access to information immediately, a sign of poor planning or no backup when employees are unavailable. Worse though is the lack of regard for each employee’s personal and private time. These are “the world revolves around me and my needs” bosses. In short order that gets old, employees get the word out, and in time the boss’s effectiveness erodes. 

 @MeetingBoy: #mybossisweird When he gets nervous, he insists on DAILY STATUS MEETINGS, then complains: not much gets done between meetings 

Over-controlling, unable to delegate, micro-managing, and ineffective describe this boss. S/he is likely insecure as a boss and the employees know it. That will get around along with the indicators of stalled productivity. 

@NicLuna  When my boss is asked a question he stays quiet and stares at the person blankly until they repeat the question #mybossisweird 

This boss comes across as playing some kind of “gotcha” game that will ultimately alienate employees and seriously limit two-way communication with him/her. Eventually, this “tick” will become fuel for the “comics” in the company who will imbed it into the boss’s brand.   

@TheREALMsWright #mybossisweird b/c when people approach her desk, she says: “What’s the deal?” instead of “How can I help you?” It’s a professional office. 

Professional behavior by the boss is important to employees. It verifies company standards and contributes to a sense of pride in their work. When the boss uses language that is incorrect, inappropriate, or inconsistent with expectations, it reflects on the boss’s values and attitudes. 

#Mybossiswonderful 

One person’s weird is another’s unprofessional. The challenge to every boss is to understand how their behavior comes across to employees. 

Our job is to create a positive climate that enables each employee to perform his/her work with minimal distraction and maximum confidence.

What our employees think and say about us have a powerful cumulative effect on our careers and our brands. Although it probably won’t be funny, we should try to stand out  in a  #mybossiswonderful hashtag game.   

Photo from The_WB via Flickr

The “Aggravating” Supervisor Problem | What’s an Employee to Do?

There’s a lot of talk about “attitude” in the workplace: 

• “That employee is giving me a lot of ‘attitude.’”
• “If s/he had a better attitude, the work would get done on time.”
• “Good performance is about attitude.” 

Our attitude speaks to our disposition and/or our frame of mind. That’s the platform we start from when we come to work. Built into our attitudes is our sense of fair play, honesty, respect, and authenticity.  When we don’t get that from our supervisors, it’s aggravating. 

The “supervisor effect” on attitude 

We expect our supervisors to do right by us and our coworkers, to be principled, and to consider the good of the team over self. When they don’t, it affects our attitude. 

When supervisors aggravate us, we: 

• Become uncooperative, pushing back on direction and/or slacking off
• Resist requests to change the way we perform work
• Stop communicating, withholding ideas
• Won’t engage in new initiatives, our development, and/or stretch goals 

We become “negative” because we see no upside to aligning with the boss. 

Assertiveness is our friend 

The more we shrink from the aggravating heavy-handedness and insensitivities of our supervisors, the more we reinforce their behavior. 

Remember: We own our careers, so we need to ensure that we can perform fully and satisfactorily in them. 

When supervisors don’t listen to our ideas, provide for adequate communication, enable us to do our work, or reward us fairly, we need to take action. 

Okay, I know you don’t want to get in your boss’s face and risk losing your job. But there are things you can do and say respectfully. 

Here are six ways an aggravating supervisor may behave and how you can counter him/her assertively (in italics) when s/he: 

• Plays the command and control card—“I expect you to follow my instructions as given without question. Understood?”
• “What would you like me to do if the process breaks down? Shall I just continue? Or would you like me to contact you? I’ll follow your instructions.”
• Thinks s/he’s the smartest—“I know the best way to solve this problem, so there’s no need for a meeting on it.”
• “We have two people in the department who dealt with a similar situation before you took over. Does your idea include their input? I mention this because I know how important the result is to you.”
• Doesn’t listen or acknowledge—“Yes, I heard you. I’m so busy. I’ll get back to you later if I have time.”
• “I can’t proceed with this project without your input. I’d like to schedule a specific time to meet later today. When are you available?
• Finds a way to make you wrong—“You could have gotten that project completed a day before deadline if you had only used the newly installed software.
• “I was gratified to meet the demanding deadline. Using the newly installed software would have cost us a day because users were unfamiliar with it.”
• Provides no rewards—“Well, team, the largest project we’ve ever been assigned was successfully completed. There will be no compensation or recognition for your extra hours. That’s just they way things are these days.”
• “Even though the company can’t compensate us for extra work, there are other ways we can celebrate our achievement. I have a few ideas or would you like to start?”
• Runs over you—“I don’t have time to wait until you get up to speed on these new regulations. I’ll assign it to someone else or do it myself.”
• “With all due respect, this is my job responsibility. I am fully committed to doing what is needed to learn this material. What specifically must I do and how would you like me to proceed?” 

Turn the tables 

Most supervisors don’t want to aggravate us, but just do. And, yes, we also aggravate them. Instead of complaining, we need to help to turn an aggravating supervisor into an engaging one? Ready to try? 

Photo from jean-louis zimmermann via Flickr

Job Title Traps and How They Can Snare You

Do you remember your first job title? In business mine was coordinator—Consumer Education Programs. Oh, that sounded so sweet to me.

Our first jobs are where we get our feet wet and start to showcase our talents. The plan is usually to upgrade our titles for swankier ones that come with higher salaries. 

The traps await 

Companies create titles to define their hierarchy and manage payroll. They write titles they hope we want to wear. 

Unfortunately, titles aren’t always what they seem to be. They can become traps, manipulations, and disguises, like this: 

Playing to your ego—We’re told we have the “potential” for a higher level job. Even though we don’t particularly want either the job or the accountabilities, we opt in, unable to resist the expected  roar of the crowd. (Trap)

Being placated—After we tell our boss (who’s been standing in our way) a hundred times that we’re frustrated about our careers, we’re given a fancy new job title and a new pay grade but our work stays the same. (Manipulation)

Inflating roles—Most often done at high levels, companies will reward loyal but dead-ended employees with fancier titles, like senior and executive VP, or even special assistant to the CEO, but the scope of their work doesn’t change. (Disguise)

Diluting value—Increasing the number of employees with titles like VP, director, and senior manager reduces the significance/importance/influence of the role, often positioning under-qualified people in them. (Trap)

Resetting pay scales—When companies need to put the lid on payroll costs, they often implement a re-titling initiative that eliminates certain titles, replacing them with others rated lower. Your new title might sound important, but it now has a reduced pay range. (Manipulation) 

I’ve been boggled throughout my career by some of my own title experiences. I was: 

• “Promoted” from consumer programs manager to management training supervisor, and never understood why the supervisor job paid more, but it did
• Promoted from customer services manager to director-customer services with a huge change in scope but no change in salary
• “Rehired” based on a reorganization, going from director-customer services to manager-business management services (whatever that meant) but my salary wasn’t affected 

In the end, the question is: “So what?” 

Achievement isn’t a title

Titles should indicate expertise, influence, and alignment. Some titles that do the well and others don’t. 

I am a big of fan Suzanne Lucas, blogger at Evil HR Lady (her tongue-in-cheek handle) and BNET. She recently wrote the spot on post, “Does Your Title Matter? Plus Free Chocolate!” (You’ll have to go there to learn about the chocolate!) 

Suzanne writes: 

“Here is my worst job title ever: Functional Lead, HR Transition.  Do you have any idea what my job responsibilities were?  Of course you don’t, unless you are one of the many people I helped ‘transition’ out of the company over the years…
And that’s the problem with bad titles.  No one that doesn’t know what you do, can figure out what it is that you do.  Now, most of the time, this makes no difference.” 

Titles only becomes traps if we let them. Just because, the company puts us in a title box doesn’t mean we’re trapped in it. 

Titles mean nothing. Results do. If you’re puffing yourself up or dragging yourself down because of your title, snap out of it. 

When someone asks you, “What do you do?” Answer the question with content, not your job title. What your title means in your company is likely not what it means in someone else’s. 

Suzanne sums it up this way:

“It’s not what your title is that really matters, it’s what you do and what your compensation is that you should be fighting for.” 

It’s a lot more important to let people know, both inside and outside your company, that you’re doing valuable work. Get people to brand you by your contribution, not your title. That’s how you’ll get to next rung of the ladder if that’s your aim.

Photo from Alex E. Proimos via Flickr

7 Ways Employees Hold You Hostage | Overcoming Resistance

Ever feel like your hands are tied? That your best efforts are getting you nowhere?

If so, it’s time to look closely at what’s going on around you. 

Whether you’re a supervisor, a team leader, or a coworker, you need the cooperation of others to get your work done. 

There’s always information, a decision, a deliverable, or a resource needed to bring an assignment to closure. The employee who controls any one of them has the power to help or hinder us. 

To be held hostage by our employees and coworkers is to be manipulated by them for their own purposes. They withhold what we need to get what they want. 

Why? 

For some employees, it’s a tactic to insulate themselves from criticism or position themselves for reward. 

It may be a sign that employees think their managers or coworkers are naïve, uninformed, unfair, or self-serving. 

It can also be a self-preservation tactic, an effort to protect their turf or to avoid changes that will expose their weaknesses. 

The 7 signs   

Hostage-taking at work doesn’t unfold like it does on the high seas. It’s gradual and often unnoticed until we’re stymied. 

To avoid being ensnared, we need to pay attention to what we see and what we hear, asking questions and intervening when there are signs. 

You know you’re being held hostage when: 

1. You never get a straight answer—Information you request is never fully available, requires additional analysis, and can only be untangled by your employee.
2. You’re told, “No one else can”—Your employee or coworker is the only person in your work group who has the knowledge, technical capability, experience, or access that is needed to complete the assignment. If s/he can’t do the work, you’re stuck.
3. Your employee has the clout—An employee, not you, has the political pull with department heads, regulators, community/political leaders, and key customers. (This often happens to new managers who take over established departments of veteran employees.)
4. You can be easily undercut— When your employee is perceived as knowing more about process mechanics, coworker issues, and customer concerns, s/he can marginalize your credibility.
5. You’re out of the loop—When your employee gets sensitive and/or important information before you do, s/he is in a position to take action in a way that enhances his/her stature and diminishes yours.
6. Employee loyalties shift—When employees have more confidence in the insights, direction, and knowledge of a coworker than you, that employee becomes a default leader, capable of supporting or undermining you.
7. You can’t get things done—When your employees are pulling the strings, they are deciding what will get done and at what pace. Without you knowing it, you’re suddenly reporting to them. 

Now what? 

It’s an odd thing when an employee holds us hostage. We can try to ignore it, but I guarantee you, it won’t go away. I know because it’s happened to me.

The solution is to break free from the employee actions that are working against you by:

• Holding employees accountable for delivering information/results as requested
• Cross-training so there is always capability back-up
• Building your own credibility with key players and influencers
• Understanding the specifics about how work is done and the issues
• Building strong internal relationships that will keep you informed
• Working with your employees to build their trust and confidence
• Developing a “get it done” culture and driving it 

You can only get caught in a hostage situation if you make yourself vulnerable. 

Employees don’t set out to undermine their supervisors or coworkers. Just like us, they want to succeed in what often looks like a tangled jungle to them. We all do what’s needed to keep our careers safe. 

Part of our job is to be a catalyst for the kind of shared success that comes from working together instead of being at odds. 

What have been your experiences? I’d love to hear from you. 

Photo: Duckie Hostage Crisis #001from jdsmith1021 via Flickr

 

Pretty Good at Managing Employee Performance? What About Bob?

Go to training. Learn how to manage people. Go back to your work group and deliver all those promised results. Sweet!

Ugh…then reality turns sweet into sour. Live situations don’t match the training role plays or the workbook exercises. 

Our success as managers is a function of our ability to select and apply the best practices we need to solve the performance issues staring at us. 

Here’s a test case for you the puzzle through. See what you think and then we’ll compare notes at the end. 

What about Bob? You decide. 

Bob is an individual contributor who wants to become a supervisor. He’s been after his supervisor, Gail, for an opportunity to demonstrate his leadership skills and his readiness for a promotion. 

Recently, Gail’s work group customer satisfaction ratings had declined, so she wanted to determine the root cause. She saw this as an opportunity to give Bob a chance to lead a team to develop an improvement plan. 

Gail met with Bob, explained her expectations, assigned three coworkers as team participants for two hours each a week, and gave Bob a deadline to deliver an action plan. She also asked for bi-weekly progress reports. 

After the first team meeting, Bob told Gail that he didn’t think the right people were on the team. He also requested more detail about what kind of action plan she wanted and tried (unsuccessfully) to negotiate more weekly meeting time. 

After each team meeting, Bob was in Gail’s office asking for more particulars about what she wanted and for her approval of his meeting minutes before sending them out. 

Bob then started having disagreements with team members and asked Gail how to handle them. He complained again that they weren’t the right people. Gail was spending almost 3 hours a week dealing with Bob. 

To make matters worse, Bob submitted the action plan a week late. It lacked substance and did not have the full endorsement of the team. 

What would you do? 

This situation challenges us to put into practice all aspects of what we’ve been taught about managing employee performance.   

Here’s my take on the performance management techniques that were at play. (The bold is what I focused on.) Gail used some techniques effectively but not others—at least not yet. What did you see? 

Employee development: Gail decides to give Bob a chance to lead a team, an opportunity for professional growth aligned with his career aspirations. The project was important and created an opportunity to engage other employees by making them part of Bob’s team. 

Project management: Gail recognized that process and accountability are important to team success, so she built that into her stated expectations for Bob when she asked for bi-weekly progress reports. 

Coaching: When Bob started having disagreements with two of the team members, Gail needed to coach him on how to resolve conflict effectively, including some self-examination by Bob about his team leadership approaches. 

Time management: Bob’s reluctance to act and/or inability to solve problems independently was costing Gail almost 3 hours a week. She needed to reestablish her expectations with Bob and hold him to them. 

Performance feedback: Bob delivered an action plan… that lacked substance which was unacceptable on several levels. So, that assignment needed to be redone with or without Bob. Bob needed specific, documented performance feedback about his work, including initiatives for further supervisory skills development. 

We need all the pieces. 

Using performance management techniques in isolation only gets us part way. Each situation we face demonstrates how different best practices intersect, strengthening each other and delivering greater benefit to the employee, the company, and ourselves. 

Effective management is both art and science. The people we work with are pieces of a complex puzzle which challenge our ability to solve problems. Individual performance management techniques are part of our toolkit. When we use them well and together, we can create a positive workplace experience. 

So how do you size up this situation?

Photo from alasis via Flickr

Employees Draining Your Time? Try “Monkey Management.”

Time is a resource we control. If we don’t, we get stressed like when: 

• We’re up against a deadline
• Work volume is overtaking us
• We need help
• Priorities conflict 

We’re not much fun to be around when we’re on edge. Time stress affects the way we relate to our peers and employees. It makes decision-making more difficult and less reliable. It takes its toll. 

Avoiding the time drain trap 

People are often the culprit, especially those who: 

• Waste our time with low value requests
• Interrupt us looking for information
• Distract us so we make mistakes or lose momentum
• Pile on by assigning new tasks 

Day-to-day, most time drains come from our own employees. That’s when we need to look within and ask ourselves, “How am I at fault for letting this happen?” 

In 1974, Bill Oncken co-authored an article for the Harvard Business Review titled, “Managing Management Time: Who’s Got the Monkey?” 

His view was that the work we assume responsibility for is the “monkey on our back.” That work, however, isn’t always really ours, but we’ve taken it on anyway, giving it our precious time. 

Oncken’s Rules

Oncken’s principles of managing management time were turned into a classic book by Ken Blanchard, The One Minute Manager Meets the Monkey. 

In it, Blanchard presents Oncken’s thesis about managing management time: 

“Taking the initiative away from people and caring for and feeding their monkeys is nothing more than rescuing them, that is, doing things for them they can do for themselves.” 

Every time we do work our employees can’t, won’t, or don’t do, we put their monkeys on our backs like this: 

Harriet comes to you at the eleventh hour to admit she doesn’t know how to upload her data for the department report. She asks you to help her just this once. You grudgingly say “yes” because that’s easy. 

What you’ve taught Harriet is that, in a pinch, you’ll bail her out. She’ll now convince herself that you don’t mind helping her and will feel free to try this tactic again. 

In this example the monkey is not Harriet and it’s not the task. Oncken tells us the monkey is “the next move.” In this case, you chose to accept Harriet’s work task as your next move. You will now add a time drain to your job and subtract one for Harriet. 

In this case, your other options were: 

1. Telling Harriet to follow the upload process in the manual
2. Accepting that Harriet’s data will be uploaded late  
3. Teaming Harriet with a peer who successfully completed the upload early and now has time to coach her 

Solution #3 likely solves the problem without it consuming your time. It keeps the monkey at the right level of the organization. You can deal with Harriet’s performance issues later. 

Managers face situations like this every day: employee requests for information, clarification, approvals, and input. Each one can become an avoidable time drain by managing the monkey—that next move. 

When faced with one of these situations, Oncken proposes we follow these four rules: 

1. Describe the monkey clearly so that you and the employee understand and agree on who has the next move(s)
2. Assign each monkey to the appropriate person/people
3. Insure the monkey by making it clear whether the responsible person: a.) must recommend and get approval from the manager before acting or b.) can act and then advise afterward
4. Check on the monkey to provide feedback, praise, or direct changes 

Work smart 

Working long hours does nothing to raise your currency with employees or bosses. Instead it’s a sign that you can’t manage your time effectively or use company resources (your employees) appropriately. 

Your employees will delegate up to you if you allow it. When you suffer from time stress, everyone in your life feels it. So do yourself a favor and read Blanchard’s book. It’s a short and easy read that will make a big difference. 

Photo from smemon87 via Flickr

When the Boss Isn’t Cutting It, What’s Really Wrong?

It’s no fun falling short. Most bosses know when employees don’t like or respect them. They often act like they don’t notice or are above caring.

Who can blame them for needing a coping mechanism?                                                         

As employees, we often assume our bosses know better—that they are ineffective on purpose. Everyone weighs in on what they believe the boss’s defects are: 

• Poor communicator or decision-making
• A pawn of upper management
• Power-seeker who likes pushing people around
• Biased or favorites player
• Incompetent or in over his/her head 

Too often, the bosses don’t know what they’re doing wrong or are afraid to find out. 

Seeing things clearly 

Twice I was called by bosses who were faced with serious employee push-back problems. 

One told me that she needed help with her communications skills. Her employees told her she was too blunt, didn’t listen, and was impatient. “Could I help her fix that?” she asked. 

The second told me that his boss was exasperated by negative employee feedback that was rising up, with employees citing his impatience, unwillingness to “do his job,” and quick-trigger decision-making. “Could I help him fix that?” he asked.

To make a long story short, what was wrong were symptoms of what wasn’t there. 

These were two leaders who recently took over organizations where employees were: 

• Unaccountable for results
• Unaware of the declining conditions of the organization
• Working in silos, adverse to collaboration
• Protective of their position/situational power
• Resistant to change

It wasn’t each boss’s personal style that was the problem but the absence of business best practices. They had both inherited organizations from predecessors who failed to lead. 

 Set employees up for success 

For bosses in this predicament, the first step is to refocus employees on the work and their roles. Success in business is about getting the right things done and not letting personalities, personal agendas, and unrealistic expectations get in the way. 

The two bosses I worked with were committed leaders—smart, courageous, visionary, and caring. So why were they perceived as being ineffective by their employees? They weren’t using basic management tools. 

Here were the issues: 

• Employees were doing their own thing
• No one saw the big picture
• Expectations within and outside were unrealistic
• Dissention and internal competition were rampant
• Accountability was non-existent 

In each case, the bosses made no changes to his/her personal styles. Instead they implemented business management best practices: 

• A “state of the organization” presentation to staff, clarifying the conditions and risks they were facing
• A goals scorecard that stated in measurable/observable terms the outcomes to be achieved during the year
• Updated position descriptions, rewritten, reviewed, discussed and agreed upon by the team
• Individual performance goals developed collaboratively with the boss and each employee, aligning each employee’s work with the organization’s goals
• Regularly scheduled progress meetings with action-oriented, time-boxed agenda items
• Immediate dialogue to address issues, concerns, and performance 

Each boss put these tools in place. The first turned a declining non-profit into one sustaining positive growth and solid jobs in hard economic times. The second became the “poster child” for effective department management in his organization. 

Getting on the right track 

These two bosses were on the verge of seeing their careers go under because they assumed the problems they were facing were about their personal styles. Trying to remake themselves would have gotten them nothing but frustration. 

This is not to say that there aren’t some bosses with toxic personalities who are the problem. For them, supervising others is the wrong job and someone needs to fix that. 

Most bosses don’t have to change anything about themselves, but they must learn to cut it as effective managers! 

It takes time (and often courage) to get these best practices in place and there will be some employee resistance that bosses need to overcome. Without best practices in place, however, real improvement and employee engagement are highly unlikely. Are you ready to give it a try? 

Photo from Nathan & Jenny via Flickr

The Price of “Going Leaderless”—Lessons from the Libyan Rebels

It’s a case of follow the leader. That’s how organizations are designed to function.  

We expect leaders to lead. Some do and some don’t. We know our success is connected to them, either directly or indirectly. The clearer their direction, the more optimistic we feel. 

Now I’ve worked for or with managers who couldn’t lead themselves out of a paper bag. They would either: 

• Do what their employees wanted—the avenue of least resistance
• Do what they thought their bosses wanted, right or wrong
• Make short-term, inconsequential decisions, easily reversed
• Talk a good game but never make anything happen, avoiding accountability at all costs 

They made me want to throw up my hands in despair: I knew that forward progress, meaningful change, and/or essential results were not coming through them any time soon. 

One step forward, a dozen back 

We may be tempted to say, at the height of our leader frustrations, that we’re better off with no leader than an impotent one. When our coworkers are great people who “get it,” have the talent, and demonstrate the will, why should we be stymied by a leader in name only. 

Do leaders really matter when we all know what we’re fighting for? 

The Libyan rebel forces attempting to overthrow the 42-year dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, are testing the question. 

They started out strong, taking cities to the east. Then they headed toward Tripoli, Gaddafi’s stronghold. The U.S., along with coalition forces, took action to create a no-fly zone, providing the rebels with some cover from the onslaught of pro-government forces. 

The rebels moved forward and then back. Forward again…back again. 

Earlier this week, Richard Engel, NBC’s chief foreign correspondent, filed reports about how the rebels were holding up under the retreat-causing pressures from Gaddafi. He made these observations:

 Many rebels were feeling dejected, losing confidence and optimism because:

• There was no central leadership to provide strategies or tactics for the fight.
• They had weapons (although not enough) but limited skills in how to use them.
• There were no coordinated means of communication to let them know how the fighting was going or to (re)direct their actions. 

Engel asked one of the rebels what keeps them fighting. The answer: Honor and the desire for freedom. 

Borzou Daragahi and David Zucchino from the Tribune Newspapers, reported in a March 31, 2011 article in The Morning Call: 

“The rebel effort was plagued by confusion and dissention. Volunteer fighters bickered over tactics and weapons.” 

More signs of the price of leaderless-ness. 

Leaders make a difference. 

 There’s a price to pay for going leaderless, heading into uncharted territory without a guide. Why? Because leaders define reality and set direction.

Leaders are the people who pull things together so that we can “battle” wisely and successfully. At work we need leaders who will: 

• Build strategies that position us for success and build optimism
• Assemble a coalition of supporters to get approval for our ideas
• Step in and halt actions that are unfair or counterproductive
• Upgrade our skills to meet new demands
• Advocate for collaboration and resolve differences
• Represent our interests in negotiations
• Obtain and allocate the resources we need
• Give us reason for enthusiasm and celebration 

When we’re leaderless, we flounder. We keep looking around, searching for someone to step in and pull everything together, putting us on sound footing. The longer we have to wait, the greater our struggle to stay motivated, confident, and optimistic. 

Just like the rebels, we want a leader who believes we’ll succeed, so we’ll believe it too and work harder. 

When it’s all on the line, great leaders pull disparate forces together.  They give us the best chance to advance, no matter what obstacles we face. When you least expect it, that leader may be you. Hope you’re getting ready!

Photo from شبكة برق | B.R.Q via Flickr

New Employees Can Mean Trouble | Managing Team Chemistry

A filled vacancy starts with optimism. The boss is high on what the new employee can add to the team. Existing employees are relieved they didn’t have to absorb more work. 

Bosses usually start with an announcement before the person shows up. Employees hear about the new hire’s capabilities and experiences. They often hear high praise for how s/he will strengthen the team. Enough already! 

New employees mean change.   

Adding someone new to the mix changes its chemistry. A new teammate comes with unknowns like his/her: 

• Personality traits, moods, ability and willingness to collaborate
• Work ethic, skills and knowledge, learning curve
• Personal aspirations, competitiveness, trustworthiness
• Performance standards, communication style, principles

Existing employees are full of curiosity and questions, even if the new employee is someone they know or know about. Each will feel out the new person in their own way, deciding what kind of relationship they will try to build. In turn, they may also modify or adjust their relationships with others on the team. 

Everyone adjusts their alignments in some way. 

While this is going on, the boss is being watched to figure out: 

• What is his/her relationship with the new employee?
• Does the newbie enjoy any favored status?
• Might the boss change his/her opinion of existing team members based on the way the new employee is accepted?  

By the natural order of things, the team dynamic starts to recalibrate. The pecking order is revisited. When supervisors don’t manage this change, they’re asking for trouble. 

Focus on the team 

Existing employees often feel diminished or even set aside when someone new comes on board. We often feel that we need to compete with this new person to show the boss that we are as good or better. 

The supervisor’s job is to create an environment where employees work effectively together, as a unit. That includes keeping a keen eye on the collective chemistry of the team, intervening when relationships aren’t what they need to be. 

Every time a new employee is added, the chemistry changes. It can be obvious immediately or surface gradually. Supervisors who guide these changes never miss a beat. 

Steps to take 

Smart supervisors take advantage of staff changes to refocus the team by following steps like these:

1. Gather the team together for introductions. 

• Introduce the new employee and review their role.
• Have each team member introduce themselves and summarize their role.
• Comment, as the supervisor, on the value each contributes. 

2. Schedule a team meeting to revisit and update position descriptions. 

• Explain the importance of keeping position descriptions current.
• Have employees suggest description changes/additions/clarification.
• Lead discussion to resolve issues and incorporate revisions.
• Finalize description updates. 

4. Schedule a team meeting to review the status of work group goals. 

• Share accomplishments to date and goals at risk.
• Engage the new and existing employees in discussion about how they can/need to assist/support each other around specific goals.
• State that you’ll be meeting with the new employee to finalize their individual goals so they align with the work group’s goals. 

5. Where useful, arrange for the new employee to spend time with each team member to learn about their work first-hand. 

The primary chemical element is you 

As supervisors, we are the first chemical element put in the beaker. The way we introduce and engage new employees demonstrates our recognition of how good chemistry can solidify a team. 

Supervisors who don’t understand or care about team chemistry will likely experience an eventual explosion. 

Show your team that you care by the way you manage their chemistry. There’s nothing better than elements that bond together to create something good. Avoid the big bang!  

Photo from Horia Varlan via Flickr

 

How Performance Reviews Brand the Reviewer

It’s a draw. All the arguments about performance reviews are correct. The process can be fair or unfair, useful or a sham, legitimate or bogus.

It all comes down to us—the reviewers.  

Do you care? 

For many supervisors, it’s about the paper, not the process. We whine about writing comments, deciding on ratings, and holding those dreaded employee review meetings.

We forget that performance reviews are about feedback. The process is supposed to be a way to help employees do their best.

Samuel A. Culbert, a professor in the Anderson School of Management at the University of California, Los Angeles raises serious points about performance reviews in his NY Times article, “Why Your Boss Is Wrong About You:”

“In my years studying such reviews, I’ve learned that they are subjective evaluations that measure how ‘comfortable’ a boss is with an employee, not how much an employee contributes to overall results. They are an intimidating tool that makes employees too scared to speak their minds, lest their criticism come back to haunt them in their annual evaluations.”

He adds: “Think about it. Performance reviews are held up as objective assessments by the boss, with the assumption that the boss has all the answers.” And, of course, s/he doesn’t.

It takes two….

We often forget that job performance is a partnership. Supervisors and employees need to work together so that right effort generates desired results.

This only happens when the supervisor is clear about what each employee needs to do to achieve stated goals. There needs to be a conversation about this—a face-to-face dialogue so employees understand what they need to do to help the cause.

That means supervisors need to be evaluated on how well their employees perform. Why? Because the supervisor is supposed to provide direction, support, and encouragement so that their employees can succeed.

Culbert proposes “the performance preview” where “both boss and subordinate are held responsible for setting goals and achieving results.” This way, he adds, “…bosses…learn that it’s in their interest to listen to their subordinates….”

Too many supervisors don’t (or can’t) write measurable/observable goals, engage with employees, or collaborate with their teams. That makes the supervisor culpable when employee performance falls short.

Face yourself.

If you asked your employees, what kind of performance reviewer you are, would they say, you:

• Just go through the motions
• Are biased
• Don’t really know what they do
• Have no basis for evaluating them
• Are objective and goals-focused
• Care about their success
• See your own performance reflected in them

Their answers brand you.

Horror and hurrah stories 

You don’t have to be in the workforce too long to experience the upside and downside of performance review. Here are examples of mine:

Horror: As a high school teacher, my supervisor was expected to observe me in the classroom at least annually. One year he chose a day when I was giving a full-period test. He sat in the back of the room, watched me pass out the test, give instructions, monitor the students, and collect their papers. My rating—Outstanding (My reaction—disgust)

Hurrah: As a corporate manager, I worked for a VP who knew the drill. Annually, he laid out his department goals, requiring each manager to do the same for his/her work group. I met with the VP to discuss and finalize my goals.

At quarterly status reviews, we’d discuss which goals were in good shape and which ones were at risk, framing recovery strategies that made the best use of remaining time and resources.

Each year there were never any surprises during my formal performance review.

(I  was expected to (and did) follow the same process with the employees who reported to me.)

Earn a positive employee rating. 

There’s no hiding the truth from your employees. They decide about the kind of person and supervisor you are by the way you review them, more than the rating itself. A strong team starts with a supervisor who’s part of it. Let that be you.

Photo from Robert Higgins via Flickr