4 Keys to Effective Listening that Maintain Mutual Respect

by Michael Allen

“Respect” does not necessarily mean to admire or even to like the other person, but it does mean to see the other person as worthy of special consideration.  Mutual respect therefore means to be considerate of each other as a means of building trust.  The primary way that we show respect is through the way that we listen to the other person and the way the other person listens to us.  There are four keys to effective listening that impact the perception of respect.

1.  Look like you are listening.  It has been said that up to 80% of what you communicate about your interest in what the other person is saying is carried by the way you look.  This includes appropriate eye contact, facial expression, body posture, arm position, etc.  If you don’t look like you are interested and that you are really listening, then the other person is very likely to feel that you aren’t and that is communicated as lack of respect.  You may be listening but failure to look like like you are listening is almost always viewed as lack of respect.

2.  Ask clarifying questions.  One of the quickest ways to demonstrate disrespect is to interrupt the other person with comments or judgement about what they are saying, but interrupting to ask a clarifying question communicates that you are listening and that you care about really understanding what the other person is saying.

3.  Paraphrase to demonstrate your desire to understand.  Paraphrasing is not repeating back exactly what the person said but rather your understanding of the meaning behind what they said.  This, like clarifying questions, indicates that you are interested in truly understanding both the content and intent behind their message and in doing so, it demonstrates respect.

4.  Apologize when you are disrespectful or perceived to be disrespectful.  Sometimes we say things that are either clearly disrespectful or could be viewed to be disrespectful by the way we said it.  In such cases it is appropriate to apologize.  We suggest that you use a “do/don’t statement” such as “I am sorry I came across that way.  I certainly don’t intend to be disrespectful, and I really do want to make sure that I understand what you are saying.”

6 Steps to Effective Accountability

by Michael Allen

“Hold them accountable for their performance!” This is an often repeated and seldom understood mantra in today’s workplace. Accountability is a critical aspect of the very best organizations, but there is a significant distinction in the way the best approach it. First and foremost, the very best do not equate accountability with punishment. But if accountability is not just punishment, then what is it? 

Accountability can be viewed as a 6-step process which, if applied correctly, will create an environment where people will willingly receive feedback and see the process as constructive.

1.  Set clear expectations 

Never expect results that you haven’t clearly communicated to your employees. If you expect them to perform in a certain manner, you must first communicate that expectation to them. Keep in mind that almost every employee wants to please the boss and experience both organizational and personal success. They can’t do this if they don’t know what is expected of them.

2.  Compare results to expectations

When possible, quantitative metrics should be in place for every desired result. These metrics should assess the relationship between the actual result and the result that was expected. If the metric shows success then positive feedback is in order. If, however, the metric indicates a gap, or failure, then move to step #3 with intentional curiosity as to why the gap exists.

3.  Account for the “why” behind failure to meet expectations (Don’t assume poor motivation)

I once had a young engineer who was just starting his career ask for the best tip I could give him as a future manager. I told him that he must be curious and a great diagnostician. Human failure is seldom the cause of anything, rather it is almost always the result of something. If you have found a gap between expectations and performance, you should work with the employee to find out what caused it. The vast majority of the time we find out it is something within the work system that caused the gap to occur and not that “they just didn’t care or work hard enough”. Remember that humans work in incredibly complex and dynamic systems and often the consequence of that complexity is human failure. Examine the context (Self; Others; Surroundings; Systems) that the person was in and which aspects of that context impacted performance. Don’t start by assuming that personal motivation is the cause. If you do, you will most likely create defensiveness and fail to find the “real” cause behind the failure. Objectively evaluate all possibilities before finalizing your conclusion. Remember, accountability literally means to “take an account” of what caused the failure.

4.  Find a fix so that the person can be successful in the future

Once you have diagnosed the cause of the failure, put a fix into place to eliminate the cause. This could be training or mentoring if knowledge or skill is missing, new equipment if failure is the result of not having the correct resources for success, contractual changes with your clients if there is incentive to rush or take short cuts, or a multitude of other fixes. Just remember that the fix should affect the cause of the actual gap, not just punish the person who failed. If progressive discipline (punishment) is in order, move to step #5.

5.  Apply negative consequences appropriately

Yes, sometimes punishment (progressive discipline) is in order, but it should only be used when trying to impact motivation or to document repeated failure. Helping the person understand the consequences of continued failure or the impact that failure is having on how he is perceived by you and/or his team members can have a significant impact of motivation. Keep in mind that the primary objective of any progressive discipline program is performance improvement. So whether you are conducting an informal counseling session or discussing a written reprimand, care should be taken to communicate clearly and respectfully, with a focus on determining the real cause of failure. 

6.  Model by holding yourself accountable for your results

Employees are impacted more by what they see their supervisors do than by what their supervisors say should be done. If you want your employees to respond positively to being held accountable then you must be open to feedback from your employees and publicly admit and diagnose your own performance gaps. This shows that accountability is not something that should be feared and it also provides the opportunity to make bosses, employees, and the organization more successful.

While these steps are important, the way you communicate is also critical. Make sure you do so with respect and with the person’s best interest in mind. If you can minimize or eliminate defensiveness, you will be well on the road to helping others improve and get the results that you both want.

You Might Not Always Get What You Want

By Michael Allen

What does it mean to have a "Formal Culture" and an "Informal Culture"?

Have you ever instituted a new policy or procedure into your organization, spent countless hours and dollars trying to drive the initiative throughout the organization, only to see it fall flat?  Organizations large and small face a similar problem -- how to make their organization become what they envision it to be.  

When organizational experts refer to the overall performance of an organization, they often use the word “culture”.  While there is disagreement on the exact definition of organizational culture, most would agree that it includes the values and behaviors that the majority of participants engage in; what most of the people believe and do most of the time.  This is called the “informal culture” as compared to the “formal culture”, or what the leadership wants the culture to be.  It makes no difference if your organization is a large corporation, a small “mom and pop”, a non-profit, or an educational institution, each of you have a formal and informal culture.  One aspect of great organizations is that they close the gap between the two cultures so that “what’s going on  - out there” very much resembles the vision of leadership.  

“Informal Culture is what 

most of the people believe and do 

most of the time.”

You may wonder if these great organizations close this culture gap by hiring the “right people”, or if they do something more intentional to close this gap.  The answer quite simply is both.  Great organizations start with great people, but they also understand and affect the other aspects of their culture.  

The Best Organizations

The best organizations don’t stop with simply creating rules and policies, they do much more to impact the everyday behavior of their employees.  If you’ll refer back to our August 2012 Post on the role of contextual factors in industrial safety incident prevention, the very best bosses and organizations understand that human performance is a result of complex systems.  Organizational factors such as rules, policies, and reward systems are only a portion of the complex system that drives human performance.  The best organizations understand that it is also people, both the individual and intact teams, plus surroundings that drive their overall performance.  If the employee base has failed to implement a new directive from leadership, there could be several reasons affecting this.  It could be that employees don’t understand the new initiative, operational pressures contradict the initiative, they don’t have the equipment necessary to make it happen, or a myriad of other factors.  The very best organizations are those that are able to gather field intelligence detailing actual performance and factors driving the performance, and then institute corrective measures that enable the workforce to align their own performance with the vision of leadership.

So what does that mean for you if you are in an organization with a gap between your formal and informal cultures?  We would first encourage you to perform a cultural analysis to get a better understanding of your informal culture.   With this knowledge you will be able to  understand what contextual factors are driving the performance of your employees.  This information will allow you to initiate corrective measures to close the gap between your formal and informal cultures.  The best organizations don’t make the mistake of simply focusing on changing people, they focus on the entire context to enable those on board to perform to a higher standard.

3 Considerations When Implementing New Policies & Procedures

by Michael Allen

Most organizations have policies and procedures that they expect employees to follow.  One difference between the best organizations and the rest is how those policies and procedures integrate with various components of the organization.  In this blog we will detail three key organizational components that the best take into consideration when evaluating and implementing new policies and procedures.  Let’s begin with an example of the impact of a new policy and its associated procedure in a normal organization.  

Company XYZ was having problems tracking expenses incurred by their employees when they were traveling on company business.  To deal with these issues, they decided to institute a policy that all employees must use a new web-based program to record all expenses, scan receipts, and track payment.  The procedure was straight forward and only required an employee to log into the system using their employee number, input requested information including the vendor name,  total amount spent, and scans of receipts.  When the information was completed the employee simply hit submit and the program took over from there.  The CFO was very excited about this new policy because it was going to make his life and his office staff’s job much easier.  Six month’s later they went back to their paper tracking system because they had continued complaints from employees and they terminated one employee who refused to use the system.  The CFO determined that it was a failure because employee’s were simply too irresponsible to use a new and simple procedure.

So how do the best avoid these types of problems?  Do they simply hire more responsible and competent employees or is there something else?  With the example above in mind, let’s examine how the best organizations look at three key factors to help develop and implement new initiatives, including policies and procedures.

1.  The Individual Employee (Self):


People are very complex and make decisions about things on the basis of a variety of factors which include knowledge and past experience.  People are also typically averse to change because it requires effort and many times is counter to the habits that they have developed over time.  The best organizations want to affect both the knowledge and habits of employees to ensure that they actually comply with new P&P.  In the case of the expense tracker, the best organizations might train employees on the proper use of the software and hardware (computer and scanner) and on the value associated with the new procedure, so that they had the necessary knowledge and skills and were therefore competent and motivated to use the new procedure.  They could also address old habits with email reminders, signage in the workplace, or other means to prompt a break in the old habits associated with the paper tracking system.

2.  Other People in the Organization and How They Affect the Individual Employee (Others):

The performance of individual employees is influenced by the people around them in significant and specific ways.  Two of the common factors exerting this influence are the “help” and “model” provided by others.  When an employee is experiencing difficulty with the execution of a new procedure because of knowledge, skill or resources, getting assistance from a coworker can provide the needed support to create success.  The best organizations create work environments where peer support and assistance is both encouraged and reinforced by management.  Modeling simply means that other people demonstrate that they are accepting change by utilizing and supporting the new policy or procedure.  When an employee sees others using the new procedure to input their expenses without complaint, they are more likely to want to comply with the policy.  If they see other employees, especially the boss, not doing so then they are more likely to see the new policy as a mere suggestion and resist or avoid the new procedure all together.

3.  The “Stuff” Around Us That Impacts Our Performance (Surroundings):

The best policies and procedures are merely good ideas without the surroundings to support their use.  Our employees work in environments that not only include other people, but also physical surroundings such as climate, equipment and the layout of that equipment.  These physical surroundings impact the ease with which people can implement new policies and procedures.  Let’s return to our expense report example.  The operations of the XYZ company are often conducted at remote sites that don’t have  the tools of a modern office.  Employees have laptops but wifi and scanners are only located at central field offices.  Employees rarely spend any significant time in these offices, rather they perform their work out in the field.  The equipment they need to use the new procedure is a resource that they would have to travel great distances, after hours to use.  For these employees, in these surroundings it was just easier to turn in paper receipts and reports hoping somebody else would log it for them.

Managers in the best organizations understand that the knowledge and habits of individual employees, the help and model provided by others, and the surroundings in which employees find themselves are significant factors in determining the successful utilization of organizational policies and procedures.  They understand that without deliberately addressing each of these contextual factors they are likely to fail in the implementation of new initiatives.

Dreaming of Greener Pasture

by Michael Allen

How do I find personal satisfaction in an organization that doesn't seem interested in being effective?

This is a very important question for all of those who have spent time working in seemingly heartless or meaningless organizations.  In January’s newsletter we defined an effective organization as one that meets its stated goals and accomplishes its stated mission.  But of course, by this definition, low goals and unimportant missions can create effectiveness and this would miss the point, therefore we add that effective organizations are those where the mission and goals are ones that people would want to invest in and/or participate in because they bring value to not only the individual, but also customers and society in general.  

So what about the employee who is stuck in an organization that doesn’t seem to meet these criteria?  The easy answer is to simply quit and find a better organization.  While this may seem to be the prudent decision, is it the right one?  Let’s now refer back to the original question and focus on a key word in the question - “seem”.  Often times employees can only guess as to what their organization’s goals and mission may be because they have not been clearly articulated (our February Newsletter topic).  Until one clearly understands where leadership is wanting to take the organization, employees should not make bad guesses about their willingness to be effective.  This is where candid and frank conversation with leadership is critical to clearly understand the mission.

For argument’s sake, let’s make the assumption that the employee is actually working in an organization that simply has no intention of meeting our definition of an effective organization.  How do we find personal satisfaction without simply leaving for greener pastures?  At this point the employee needs to focus on what they can control and influence within the organization.  They have control over their own performance and influence over the performance of their team.  To this end, an objective setting and strategy exercise can help the person move toward higher satisfaction.  We would recommend that the employee set short, intermediate and long term objectives for themselves and, where possible, their team.  These objectives should meet five SMART criteria. 

1. Specific
2. Measurable
3. Attainable
4. Relevant
5. Time Bound

Once we have SMART objectives in mind, the next step would be to create a task list which would take us step-by-step to the accomplishment of each objective.  The key to reaching our objective is to stick to the plan while measuring its effectiveness.  These measurements of effectiveness are critical to determining if we are on the right track.  If the measurements are in-line, we should continue on course until the objective is met.  If the measurements show that we are somehow failing, we need to either tweak the task list, or reassess the objective.

We find that those who focus on individual and team objectives, with a sound strategy for attaining and measuring, have greater satisfaction and better performance than those who simply go to work every day, counting the days until the next paycheck.  In the end, organizational effectiveness is impacted by both organizational mission and employee performance.  Not all of us have control or even influence over mission, but we all have considerable impact on our own performance and the objectives that we set can help improve that performance and ultimately our satisfaction.

The Secret to Conflict Resolution -- Stop Compromising

by Michael Allen

We hear the word “compromise” anytime we turn on the TV or read a newspaper article about how the U.S. Congress should fix our fiscal woes.  Talking heads and Joe Public alike beg for more compromise to fix the situation.  Is it possible that compromise is what is putting us in such a predicament?  Compromise is based on giving up something you want, thus it is based on “losing”.  As that term suggests, I give a little, you give a little, and we meet somewhere in the middle at an agreement.  While compromise sounds like the best way to get unstuck, it actually leaves both parties feeling unsatisfied, almost as if they gave up too much.  

To truly resolve conflict we suggest another “C” word -- “Collaboration”.  To collaborate, two or more parties must brainstorm ideas to fix a problem.  The goal, in the end, is to walk away with a solution that is more likely to truly “fix” the situation over which the parties were at odds to begin with.  The process is really pretty easy.  First, the two parties must come to an agreement on a goal that they both want to achieve.  Once that goal is agreed on, they brainstorm ways to get them to their shared goal.  No giving up one’s beliefs or buying into the other guy’s beliefs, simply agreed upon strategies that can get both parties what they have agreed that they both want.  The task then is to choose one solution that both parties have already agreed will achieve the common goal.

Let’s look at an actual conflict that shows how this works.  There was a state in the Southern U.S. that was having violent clashes between Pro-Choice and Pro-Life groups.  The state’s governor knew he must do something before more violence led to somebody’s death.  He told his assistant that he wanted the leadership of both groups to meet with him so they could come to some sort of agreement to stop the violence.  His assistant, thinking the governor had lost his mind, questioned if getting these two groups together in the same room was wise, but the governor insisted.  

When the meeting did occur, both sides were at each other’s throats from the moment they arrived in the meeting room.  The governor eventually created calm so that he could address the restless crowd.  What he told them was surprising even to is staff.  He said, “As you all know, we have a significant teen pregnancy problem in our state.  We rank 49^th out of the 50 states in teen pregnancies and 50^th in the number of teenaged abortions.  What I need from you is to help me solve this problem.  I need your ideas for cutting back the rate of teen pregnancy so that we can cut the number of abortions in the state.”  Both sides instantly changed their demeanor.  After all, the vast majority of abortions are performed on teenaged mothers.  If they could solve that problem, their debate would become moot.  

For the next few weeks both sides met and came up with a strategy to lower the pregnancy rate of girls in their state.  They worked together, civilly to reach a common goal, and in the end, they lowered the teen aged pregnancy rate over 50% in their state.  

How about you, how does this work in your world?  Can you find a common goal to work towards rather than trying to determine what you are willing to give up, and therefore feeling unsatisfied?  Stop compromising when you are at odds with your co-worker, spouse, or neighbor and find a way to create an action plan that gets you both to a mutual goal.  If only they understood this in Washington.  

Don't Throw Them Under the Bus

by Michael Allen

This month’s “Best Boss” characteristics are being a problem solver and a team builder.  Best Bosses  often exemplify these characteristics in tandem, at a moment when lesser bosses solve problems at the expense of the team.  That moment is when poor performance has resulted in a problem and it just seems easier to throw the “guilty” under the bus.  Instead, effectively redirecting poor performance can single-handedly change the fortunes of an employee, team, or even the organization as a whole.  The best bosses use these redirection moments to not only take performance from bad to good, but build team morale.  

Let’s use a specific example to make sense of the skills that shape these characteristics.  Thomas is an engineer working with a team of other engineers on a project with the company’s most important client.  Thomas is tasked with providing specs for the design of a key portion of the project to the team, upper management, and the client.  During the presentation, the client becomes very upset when a fundamental error is discovered in the supply chain logistics.  The client leaves the meeting and tells the team lead, Sarah, that she has one week to fix the problem before they begin looking for a new engineering firm.  Sarah is taken back by the threat of losing the client and now has some very tough decisions to make.  

The first thing she does is assemble the team and give them the latest details on the timeline and the mistakes made.  Sarah’s next step clearly identifies her as a “Best Boss.”  She says, “Look, at some point, we’ve all made a mistake that could impact the success of our team.  I don’t blame any individual for the supply chain issue, but I now ask that we all lean on one another to fix the problem, and in the end, we will flourish as a team.”  

At this critical moment it would be very easy, and costly, for her to blame Thomas for the mistake.  After all, he is in charge of the supply chain.  To some bosses, he must be held accountable which in many cases means punishment.  Fortunately, Sarah does not jump to place blame, but instead rallies the troops to come together and fix it as a team.  From that moment on, the team will have increased morale and a sincere sense of being a part of a true team.

The next thing she does is facilitate a rigorous problem solving session where they: 

1. Identify the Problem
2. Explore the Problem
3. Set Objectives
4. Create an Action Plan
5. Measure and Correct

In the end, the team finds the cause of the error and fixes it to such an extent that the client thanks them for their attention to detail.  They remain their top client to this very day.  Thomas is now a team lead on a different team and claims that, without Sarah, he would never have reached such a level in the company.  He still calls her weekly for tips on managing his new team. 

Your Culture Gap is Showing

The Gap between your Formal and Informal Cultures is as simple as 'Follow the Leader'

by Michael Allen

Companies often express frustration that their operations fail to live up to the standards set forth for itself.  These companies are essentially describing gaps between their formal (company standard) and informal (what actually happens) cultures.  While many factors contribute to this gap, such as communication, size, number of locations and hiring practices, maybe the single most prevalent force in driving informal culture is the behavior of front line managers and supervisors. 

One important characteristics of a “Best Boss” is leading by example.  On the surface, this seems like a straightforward and common characteristic of many bosses, but let’s look deeper.  How does the significance of this characteristic extend beyond just the personal esteem in which we hold the boss to the point that it actually impacts the success of the entire organization?  

A workplace is an extremely complex and dynamic organism and the workers themselves will only act in ways that make sense to them in the moment.  If the actions of supervisors suggest that certain behaviors are acceptable, even if they fly in the face of company policy, the employees will be prompted to act in the same manner as their leader.  Even worse, if the boss is allowed to pick and choose which rules to follow, he or she is giving unspoken permission for others to do the same.

Let’s look at a specific example.  There is a manufacturing company that has very high safety standards, including the proper use of PPE (Personal Protective Equipment).  The plant manager is well known to show up on the manufacturing floor wearing his Nike training shoes and a hat of his favorite football team.  While he may try to justify not wearing PPE in his own mind, what he fails to recognize is the precedent he is setting for the workforce.  After all, if the boss can wear his tennis shoes on the plant floor, why can’t the others?  Not only is he not modeling the proper standard, he has now set the precedent that the standards themselves are simply suggestions and not to be taken seriously.  

Some of you may be asking yourself, “but what if I make a simple mistake and now I’m leading the entire team down the wrong road?”  There is actually no better time to demonstrate the characteristic of leading by example than when you make a mistake.  Simply stating your mistake and the steps that you are going to take to rectify the situation shows that you do in fact care about the standards of the company, and most importantly, that you are willing to hold yourself accountable to the standards.  The resulting impact on informal culture is that the formal culture will be seen as worthy of being embraced and that everyone is able - especially leaders - and prepared to redirect and be redirected for performance that doesn't match the desired culture.  

We won’t go into detail in this post about what leaders do to redirect bad performance, in themselves or others, but you can click here to read an archived newsletter on that topic.

Can you work incident free without the use of punishment?

by Michael Allen

I was speaking recently to a group of mid-level safety professionals about redirecting unwanted behaviors and making change within individual and systemic safety systems.  I had one participant who was particularly passionate about his views on changing the behaviors of workers.  According to him, one cannot be expected to change behavior or work incident free without at least threatening the use of punitive actions.  In his own words, “you cannot expect them to work safely if you can’t punish them for not working safely.”  He was also quite vocal in his assertion that it is of little use to determine which contextual factors are driving an unsafe behavior.  Again quoting him, “why do I need to know why they did it unsafely?  If they can’t get it done, find somebody that can.”  

What an Idiot!

I meet managers like this from time-to-time and I’m immediately driven to wonder what it must be like to work for such a person.  How could a person like this have risen in the ranks of his corporate structure?  How could such an idiot...oh,wait.  Am I not making the same mistakes that I now, silently scold him for?  You see, when people do things that we see as evil, stupid, or just plain wrong, there are two incredibly common and powerful principles at play.  The first principle is called the Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) and, if allowed to take over one’s thought process, it will make a tyrant out of the most pleasant of us.  The FAE says that when we see people do things that we believe to be undesirable, we attribute it to them as being flawed in some way or to them having bad intentions.  They are stupid, evil, heartless, or just plain incompetent.  If we assume these traits to be the driving factor of an unsafe act and we have organizational power, we will likely move to punish this bad actor for their evil doings.  After all, somebody so (insert evil adjective here) deserves to be punished.  The truth is that most people are good and decent people who just want to do a good job.  

Context Matters

This leads us to our second important principle, Local Rationality.  Local Rationality says that when good and decent people do things that are unsafe or break policies or rules, they usually do it without any ill-intent.  In fact, because of their own personal context, they do it because it makes sense to them to do it that way; hence the term “local rationality”.  As a matter of fact, had you or I been in their situation, given the exact same context, chances are we would have done the same thing.  It isn’t motive that normally needs to be changed, it’s context.  

With this knowledge, let’s look back at the two questions from our Safety Manager.  

1. “How can I be expected to change behavior or work incident free, without threatening to to punish the wrong-doers?” and 
2. “Why do I need to know why they did it unsafely?  If they can’t get it done, find somebody that can.”  

Once we understand that, in general, people don’t knowingly and blatantly do unsafe things or break rules, rather that they do it because of a possibly flawed work system, e.g. improper equipment, pressure from others, lack of training, etc., then we have the ability to calmly have a conversation to determine why they did what they did.  In other words, we determine the context that drove the person to rush, cut corners, use improper tools, etc.  Once we know why they did it, we then have a chance of creating lasting change by changing the contextual factors that led to the unsafe act.  

Your key take-aways: 

1. When you see what you think is a pile of stupidity, be curious as to where it came from.  Otherwise, you may find yourself stepping in it yourself.
2. Maybe it wasn’t stupidity at all.  Maybe it was just the by-product of the context in which they work.  Find a fix together and you may both come out smelling like roses.

Because I Said So! The Importance of “WHY”

by Michael Allen

Sending a clear message, such as an assignment to an employee requires that we make sure that Six-Points are understood: WHO-WHAT-WHERE-WHEN-HOW & WHY.  Sometimes we send mixed or unclear messages because we leave out one or more of these points.  This can happen because we are pressed for time, we assume understanding or because we just don’t see the importance of that point.  Failure to communicate any of these points could lead to failure, but one point in particular can really impact motivation.  

In most organizations, there are those tasks that nobody enjoys doing.  They may be either repetitive or noxious, but they have to get done anyway.  For example, some of our client companies use Behavior Based Safety (BBS) as a component of their comprehensive safety program.  One aspect of many of these BBS programs is the requirement for employees to complete “observation cards” on a regular basis (a repetitive task).  We find that many employees don’t see the importance of this task, so they put it off until the last minute and then “pencil-whip” or “make up” the observations just to satisfy the requirement.  The reason this happens is because the employees don’t really understand the “WHY” behind the observation task.  Supervisors assume that they understand the purpose behind the task so they don’t take the time to communicate this clearly to their employees.  As you might guess, this “false” data can lead management to make safety decisions that may be misguided.  We have found that simply telling employees that their observations are actually used to direct safety decision-making by management can greatly increase the validity of those observations.  

People need to understand why they are being asked to do something that they don’t really like to do.   Simply saying “because I said so” doesn’t work with children and it certainly doesn’t work with employees.  Take the time to clearly communicate the reason behind what you are asking them to do and you will increase motivation.

Why Do I have to Tell Them Everything?

by Michael Allen

We all want our employees to take appropriate initiative in their jobs because it makes our jobs a lot easier and makes the employees’ jobs more interesting.  Here are four critical factors in getting increased initiative on the job.

  4 Keys to Increasing Employee Initiative

1.)  Tell them that you want it.  Giving permission to show initiative can open the door to appropriate “initiative taking.”  Some people have been punished in the past for acting before being told and they are reluctant to step out again.  The first key is to let them know that you want them to take appropriate initiative. 

2.)  Focus on confidence-building.  The key to building confidence is to give people meaningful activities to accomplish and then follow success with your recognition.  Remember that “meaningful” is in the “eye of the beholder”.  What you see as meaningful may not be seen the same way by the employee.  Take time to know your employees’ aspirations and engineer opportunities for meaningful success.

3.)  Reinforce initiative taking.  Certainly recognize success, but even when failure occurs you can recognize the effort.  You never want to recognize/reward failure because that creates confusion about expectations, but you can recognize that the person attempted something and that you want them to continue showing initiative.  For example, you might say, “Even though the result was not what was expected, I want to thank you for trying it on your own.  I appreciate your initiative.  Now let’s talk about how to get a better result.”

4.)  Redirect failure without reducing self-esteem.  Aways focus negative feedback on the result, behavior, or both, but never on the person as a person.  Blaming the person only serves to reduce self-esteem and reduces the probability of taking initiative in the future.

Help!! I'm tired of doing everything myself!

3 Steps to Make Delegating Less Risky

by Michael Allen

Many of us find that we just can’t seem to get done in a day everything that needs to get done.  If we work alone, then this may be primarily a personal time management issue, but if we supervise a team, then it may well be a delegation and training issue.

Sometimes we fail to delegate tasks to our team members because we simply don’t trust them.  We have delegated to someone in the past and they have failed us, so now we are afraid to try it again.  The fact is that, as supervisors, our job is to get results through the efforts of our team members and if we aren’t delegating, we are not doing what we are getting paid to do.  

So how do you develop enough trust so that you are willing to take the “risk” of delegating?  

1.  Do an Ability Inventory -- The first step is to accurately understand the ability level of each team member with respect to each task for which they have responsibility.  An honest evaluation of ability will give you a starting point.  

2.  Delegate with Support -- Once you have this information, then you can determine what and to whom you can give more responsibility.  Make sure that you provide enough support to ensure success without “looking over their shoulder” all the time.  

3.  Develop “The Bench” -- Additionally, you need to determine an on-the-job training process to develop the skills needed by each team member so that they can be successful when delegated specific tasks.  This gives you more “bench strength” so that you have more options for delegation.  

Balancing delegation and training will really help you manage your time and also help manage the time of your team members.