Giving feedback to employees is critical for improvement to occur, but effective feedback involves avoiding these four pitfalls.
1. Avoiding feedback all together or waiting too long to give it
Research has demonstrated that feedback that follows immediately after the action will have the biggest impact on the behavior. Immediate negative feedback will weaken unwanted behavior and immediate positive feedback will strengthen behavior. But don't let not being able to give immediate feedback keep you from giving it at all. Later is still better than not-at-all!
2. Over-or under-boarding
Have you ever seen a manager call someone up in front of a group for some success and go on-and-on about the success, totally embarrassing the recipient of the praise? That is what we call "over-boarding" and it should be avoided because the praise actually becomes punishing and has an effect opposite of that which is desired. On the other hand, failing to provide enough feedback for significant success can lead to reduced motivation in the future. For example, you just saved the company $2 million and the boss, in private says, "Hey, thanks". Make it appropriate to the level of success.
3. Blaming the employee for a failure
Blame rarely fixes anything; it usually only de-motivates. Focus on finding the real reason for a failure and fix that. Blame may be quick and satisfying, but it is not effective.
4. Punishing in public
No one likes being "made an example of" or humiliated in front of their peers. Such humiliation leads to "getting even" and employees can be very creative when getting even ... like work slow-downs, fake injuries, bad-mouthing the boss behind his back, or talking bad about the company to potential customers. Negative feedback should always be given in private. There are instances when a witness will be present, but the witness should not be a coworker of the person receiving feedback.
“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.
How can I influence employees to "buy-in" to the mission of the organization?
by Ron Ragain, Ph.D.
As we stated in our last newsletter, the mission of an organization “is its reason for existing, its purpose, where it is headed”. People need to know, understand and “buy-in” to the mission so that they can “get on board” and help with its accomplishment. But how can you get them “on board”?
Average organizations assume that people are on board when they read the mission statement, so they place signs and even plaques around their facilities, on the walls in conspicuous places, so that employees are always aware of the mission. We call this “buy-in by proclamation” and it is a strategy that a lot of managers use when giving assignments and introducing change. However, while awareness is essential, it is not sufficient for buy-in.
The key is to “influence”, not to dictate or merely proclaim. Influence is not related to “power” but rather to understanding and therefore requires communication of the impact of accepting the mission and the individual’s role in its accomplishment. This requires communication of something more than the mere mission statement. It requires communication of the relationship of the organization’s mission to the success of the organization, the individual and society in general. We recommend following a 4-step process in communicating these relationships.
Articulate the importance of the mission to the success of the organization.
Articulate the importance of the mission to the individual team members.
Articulate the importance of the mission to society/customers.
Communicate 1, 2 and 3.
While we could discuss these steps in the abstract, it might be helpful to use a specific example, so let’s use The RAD Group’s mission statement as that example.
“The RAD Group’s mission is to improve individual, team and organizational performance. We seek to provide products and services that help leaders create a culture in which employees are skilled, motivated and able to serve all stakeholders - employees, investors/owners, customers and others.”
1. Articulate the importance of the mission to the success of the organization. This mission statement helps to guide our decision making relative to what products and services we develop. Not all products and services fit with our mission and we only consider those that do. Likewise, not all products and services that fit our mission are accepted or developed; only those that are deemed to contribute to both the success of our customers and the success of The RAD Group.
2. Articulate the importance of the mission to the individual team members. Every team member of The RAD Group understands that his/her success is in some part tied to the success of the organization. Likewise, every team member understands how his/her performance impacts the success of every other team member and therefore, our ability to succeed as an organization. Marketing impacts our image, research impacts the quality of the products and services that we develop and delivery impacts our reputation and impact on the performance of our customers. The understanding of this connectedness increases the motivation of each of our team members to work toward the accomplishment of our mission.
3. Articulate the importance of the mission to society/customers. This may sound a bit lofty, but we need to understand that if our mission does not provide value to society, and especially our customers, that there is little or no reason to exist as an organization. We believe that what we do provides value to our customers by improving their performance and we constantly challenge ourselves to both demonstrate and increase that value.
4. Communicate 1, 2 and 3. While we do attempt to communicate our mission formally through papers, speeches and marketing materials, communication does not have to only be formal. It can be done through conversation with customers and within the organization by respectfully challenging and evaluating ideas to determine if they align with the mission. We bring our mission statement to life, not by having it on a plaque (although we do have it on our business cards as a reminder), but rather by asking ourselves regularly if our products and services are improving the individual, team and organizational performance of our customers. We also attempt to measure that impact to help us fine tune those products and services.
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 49th out of the 50 states in teen pregnancies and 50th 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.
Despite a now insignificant pre-Y2K (Year 2000) computer software plot and laughable late-90’s fashion, the 1999 cult movie classic Office Space still matters in today’s workplace -- in your office space. The social commentary on display through caricatures of the American workforce, such as the “Upper Management” character Bill Lumbergh, still stings. People still laugh at this movie because bosses and companies still do the very things that this movie makes fun of.
If you have never seen Office Space, the name Lumbergh might not mean anything to you. If you have seen the movie, the video clip below may just inspire a revision of your weekend entertainment plans. Either way, the clip should serve as a decent framework for understanding what has come to be known as the Lumbergh Principle.
Actor Gary Cole portrays the perfect disingenuous, high achieving authority figure -- the type that would have been likely shot in the back by his own soldiers in a time of war, yet manages to ascend into Senior Management in environments with less plausible deniability. In this instance, Corporate Vice President Bill Lumbergh pours on the friendly.
This is not, however, what our “Best Boss” research sample of **20,000** employees meant when they described the best boss they had ever had as -- being friendly.
We instinctively know that a “Best Boss” is a friendly boss. As children and employees, we have seen sufficient successful parental and supervisory applications of friendliness used to help the one with authority to get results from the efforts of others that lack authority. Certainly the pendulum of leadership history is heavy on the side of heavy handedness, but the modern workplace is different. Given the choice of a friendly boss or an unfriendly one, both the shiny shoes in the corporate tower and the dirty boots on the shop floor have come to prefer the friendly approach.
The Bill Lumberghs of the world also recognize the obvious correlation between Friendliness, Best Boss Status, and Desirable Results. So, they have done what only makes sense -- pretend to be friendly.
The problem is that friendly can’t be faked. It can be, but not with “Desirable Results” as the predictable outcome.
The Lumbergh Principle defined -- Friendly doesn’t work, if you don’t mean it
The heart of the issue is that employees and kids alike can tell if you mean it.
Advice for Accidental Lumberghs
1.) Knowing that you can’t fake friendly, don’t try. Be yourself.
2.) It is possible that your employees think of you as a walking-talking Lumbergh Doll and all you are really doing is innocently imitating an unfortunate model from your past. Open your eyes and align yourself instead with the basic tenets of Best Boss Friendliness:
Friendly is not about hiding behind friendly words. It means not being Antagonistic or Hostile.
Friendly is not about forsaking performance to be nice. It means showing concern for things that concern others and listening to help deal with those concerns.
Friendly is not about being buddies. It means creating a relationship that helps individuals and teams share their concerns and ideas while working to accomplish their agreed upon objectives.
3.) Take the time to understand some of the potential consequences of a Lumbergh-esque style:
Subordinate Resentment
Disengagement from Team Goals
Sabotage (remember that the subordinate characters in Office Space go on to embezzle millions and even burn down the office, even as the audience roots for them to get away with it.)
The loss of genuine access to the hearts and minds of employees when in a position to actually work with them to “Find a Fix” for their concerns and the concerns of the team.
4.) Talk with someone away from work or away from home about why you are having trouble shedding your Lumbergh skin. Feeling the need to fake friendly or the genuine lack of concern for others may indicate there is an opportunity to dig deeper into your own personal context and maybe improve more than just performance metrics.
Before you discount this concept as something only valuable for the “shiny shoe”, white-collar crowd, watch this out-of-the-cubicle take on the same approach. Lumbergh’s cousin, the Drilling Rig Safety Man, stands even less a chance of improving performance with this strategy.
Video Production Note -- **The script direction said to think Eddie Haskell from Leave it to Beaver, but unexpectedly - Lumbergh showed up. Did you catch it? Great.
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.
by Ron Ragain, Ph.D. Micro-management is the failure to delegate when delegation is appropriate. It is giving an assignment to an employee who has the capability of executing on their own and then overseeing the details of the execution of the assignment. In many cases, it is driven by a lack of trust in the other person, but even if it is not, it is almost always viewed as such. The perception of lack of trust increases frustration and reduces both motivation and the desire to show initiative. In other words, micro-management creates an environment that negatively impacts results. So how do you overcome the tendency to micro-manage? The key is trust, and trust grows with successful accomplishment. There are three steps to developing trust.
Fairly evaluate the competencies of the individual. The tasks that you assign require certain competencies for success. Start by identifying those competencies and then evaluate your employee’s skill set relative to those competencies. If a skill is lacking you can provide support through training. If all the skills are present then you can predict a high probability of success.
Make assignments on the basis of competencies. The more success that you observe and the individual achieves, the more trust you will have in the person and the more confidence the person will have in their ability. Making assignments on the basis of competencies increases the chances of success.
Communicate your expectations and trust to the individual. When making assignments, make sure that you clearly communicate your expectations by providing information needed for success. We call these the six-points of a clear message and they include What-When-Where-Who-How-Why. Don’t over focus on the “How” component with a competent employee because this can communicate lack of confidence in their ability. Make sure that you give them information that may be specific to the current task that they might not have, such as “When” you need the task accomplished. When appropriate, communicate that you have every confidence in their ability to complete the task at hand.
Empowering employees to accomplish tasks on their own not only creates a more confident and competent workforce, it also gives you more control over your time and peace of mind.
by Ron Ragain, Ph.D. As a supervisor, one of the ways that you get your job done, and manage your time more effectively is to delegate to your employees. Delegating requires trust in their ability to get the results that you expect. Here are four keys to making sure you delegate effectively.
Identify the competencies required to accomplish the task. This sounds simple, but how many times do we actually do a task analysis before making an assignment. We know the result that we want, but many times we don’t take the time to really determine how we want that result achieved. Understanding what competencies are needed for success is critical before you can do what comes next.
Assess your employees relative to the task competencies.An honest comparison of employee skills/competencies against task requirements will help you determine whether you can delegate or whether you need to provide additional support to the employee, including training.
Communicate your expectations clearly.When giving an assignment, there are 6-points that need to be understood by the employee:What, Who, When, Where, Why and How.If you are delegating to an employee who has the requisite competencies, then probably all you will need to communicate is “What result you need”.If this is a special situation then you will need to communicate those aspects of the task that make this special, e.g., when you need it done.Going over every detail of “How” is certainly not needed if the person is truly competent in this task and doing so would be seen as “micro-managing” due to lack of trust.
Give appropriate feedback once the task is done.Feedback is obviously dependent on result, but don’t forget to give positive feedback for success (maybe a simple “thank you”).If failure occurs, then take the time to determine why so that you can make sure that failure doesn’t occur again.
Positive feedback strengthens performance and increases the likelihood of repeated success. Really effective supervisors use more positive feedback than they do negative feedback. Here are four ways to use positive feedback successfully.
1. Give positive feedback in front of peers, but make sure that it is done in a manner that is not embarrassing to the person.
2. Explain “why” you are pleased with their performance. Make sure the person understands the relationship between their performance and the success of the team when possible.
3. Place a “letter of commendation” in the person’s personnel file and make sure that the individual has a copy of the letter.
4. Note their successes as part of their performance review so that the person can see the connection between specific successes and your evaluation of overall performance.
