You know who I’m talking about, too. Those people who just never seem happy; who always see the negative even when the message is positive; who suspect ulterior motives regardless of act. They are the literal “pain in your neck.” Personally, I could recommend you just whack ‘em. That’ll please a lot of people working nearby, and you’d be surprised at the immediate effect that would have on other malcontents in the organization.
But then, we wouldn’t need this article, so here we are. You’re stuck with them, or keeping them for some reason, or simply want to help them emerge from their dark hole.
Here are some ways you can deal with these sourpusses:
What attitude? Typically, when you try to address an “attitude,” you get a blank, puzzled stare, and some horse hockey about they “have no idea what you’re talking about.” So, let’s get specific. Frankly, it’s not the attitude; it’s the observable behavior that’s a problem.
“Sue, I hear you comment or complain every time we roll out a new initiative. Frankly, I want it to stop. Now. Keep it to yourself, or go speak with your supervisor. No more vocal whining to others.”
You get the idea. Freedom of speech is a protection between the individual and the state (government). Employees’ speech is not protected in the workplace; you can determine–and explicitly state–what is and isn’t acceptable in your organization. (obvious exceptions to this are harassment, retaliation, SOX disclosures, etc.) The idea here is not overt heavy-handedness, it’s making sure the workforce isn’t subjected to a constant complainer’s rants.
Proselytizing may help. Try to convert them to your way of thinking. Be direct in your comments, and explain why it’s in their best interest to become more positive. Let these folks know that their perceived attitudes (demonstrable, of course) are noticed by others, and certainly effect their ability to succeed in the organization.
In other words, explain the WIIFM: “What’s in it for me.”
“Janet, I want you to be more positive in your interactions with others. Your negativity is noticeable and not much fun to be around. I want to help, so let’s discuss.”
Sometimes, the “next step” may be necessary. “Bill, I need you to behave more positively—in fact, it’s necessary if you want to continue to work here. Smile a bit, be pleasant when asked for help, respond to ‘hellos’ and ‘good mornings.’”
Zero tolerance is the rule. They are called “non-negotiables.”
When you decide to change a malcontent to something more positive, be specific as mentioned above, and then be prepared: you must address each and every “slip” or transgression that deviates from your discussion.
Every. Single. Instance.
No letting up, no “letting it slide.” If you do, each time it occurs you’ve “reset” the entire change process. There can be no turning back. If they do well for three weeks then have a relapse, you simply cannot think “well, they’ve done well up until now—let’s see how it plays out.” No, you’ve got to address it.
Immediately.
No try, only do. Master Yoda was right – there’s no credit for saying “I’ll try,” or “make every effort.” There’s only credit for actually doing.
You need a firm commitment from this yahoo that s/he will take immediate, positive action to correct this unacceptable behavior – not that they’ll “do their best to be more positive,” in some vague indeterminate sense.
Make it crystal clear that this is not some esoteric “hope you can do better;” it’s a must-have, a condition for future advancement, opportunities, and yes, maybe even continued employment.
Close ain’t good enough (pardon the grammar transgression, mom). To continue the thinking from 3 & 4 above, this isn’t hand grenades or horseshoes.
Even when this person is making an effort, you must be diligent. They’ve got to nail it down correctly. Coming close, even if well-intentioned, won’t work here. Remember, you could have simply tolerated the behavior as we had been doing; you chose, instead, to attempt to change it. You must stay the course, and you must be crystal clear.
Close isn’t good enough.
Inspect what you expect. Follow-up, diligently and repeatedly.
This person needs to know that you aren’t simply “having a nice discussion.” We are discussing performance-related behaviors, we expect them to change to reach acceptable standard, and we intend–as with any good performance management effort–to follow-up to insure those changes are implemented.
In other words, “I’ll be watching…”
This is important, for a couple of reasons: First, this employee needs to know–really, personally understand–that your expectations are for immediate, positive performance improvement. No better way to demonstrate that then being around to see it.
Second, you may actually “catch them” doing something right, in which case, that’s a super time for a little positive reinforcement (see proselytizing above).
Never let ‘em see you sweat. Don’t get mad, upset, frustrated or annoyed. Treat as you would any other aspect of an employee’s performance. You’ve done nothing wrong—don’t feel bad or guilty, and never assume ownership of someone’s employment conditions when they have the power to change and control those conditions.
Remember, this too shall pass.
Malcontents generally know they aren’t the most pleasant people in the world; they typically, however, feel somewhat justified in their actions, and certainly don’t always realize the extent of their behavior. And those who do generally succeed in being “difficult to talk to,” so their behavior goes unchecked.
In this and the final remaining blog entry, I’m expanding on the “5 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” I outlined in a recent article.
The fourth law should be unnecessary — make your expectations — as a manager and leader — clear. And that’s “clear” as in crystal, not mud.
Law #4. Make your expectations clear, then back up a bit and give employees room to do their job. That doesn’t mean “never look back;” to inspect what you expect isn’t micro-management, it’s just good-management.
Employees – even top performers – need clear expectations. In fact, especially top performers. Give ‘em a target, provide resources and guidance, remove obstacles when necessary, then let them do their job.
Check back later, since you still have the real management responsibilities and accountability. Hate to quote Ziglar again, but there’s a lot of truth in remembering to inspect what you expect.
Tell your staff what you expect — in clear language; inspect the results of their efforts toward those expectations, then hold them accountable for that performance.
Let’s keep this simple — it doesn’t have to be difficult.
We obviously need both processes AND people in a successful business activity (don’t we?). But which is more trustworthy?
Wow, what a great question, if I do say so myself.
Processes are simply and totally repeatable; they are the diagram for a series of successful operations that a business needs to succeed, and when done correctly, act as a blueprint for those operations. In other words, they are consistent, repeatable, and known for their prior success. Good stuff, these processes. They tell us what to do, how to do it, and when it must occur. Seems like nirvana to me, eh?
Hmmm, maybe not…
People, of course, are the fly in the ointment.
When processes break down, people are generally at the core. When specific actions begin to work against the system instead of in support, we can again usually point to people as the difficulty. The people element in a process is the least consistent, the least replicable.
In other words, people are nowhere as “clean,” from a business activity view, as are credible, substantiated, proven processes. They are free-thinking, changing, ad-hoc, seat-of-the-pants animals. Having said that (I love that phrase)…
Processes are woefully inadequate in their contingency and coverage. You cannot possibly have a sound, working, proven process for every conceivable business operation, activity, or event. And processes, of course, cannot think, use judgment, or learn from mistakes (not that some people always do either).
In other words, the process is the best start, but ultimate completion — and success — rests on people.
So, my choice is people… but not without reservations.
Deming said that the system (processes) causes up to 90% of all errors in a business. I’m not sure that, outside a discrete manufacturing process, that always holds true as a specific number, but as a concept, it seems quite accurate.
The rub of the system is that, the processes we hold so dear are created and authored by people, who have the same limitations inherent in the processes they are creating.
In other words, we use an error-laden ‘process’ (people), to create our ‘processes.’
Heavy stuff.
I’ve got a nifty idea, then… How about we use people to create sound, meaningful processes that successfully take advantage of the available strengths of our – you guessed it – people??
Apologies for the length. We recently received an email from a junior executive we had worked with for several years. He left the client company about a year ago, and decided it was time to let us know what he thought of us. For those who know us well, you know this could have gone several ways… 🙂
Ed. The tuna reference will just have to remain a mystery… feel free to ask one of us if it’s bothering you to untoward proportions.
This is, however, 2018, and the need to be transparent is overwhelming me. Plus some of them are kinda strange as I thought of ’em.
I grew up in a two-bedroom house with four sisters, a mother and a grandmother. An isolated male buoy in the middle of an estrogen ocean. Some say “that explains a lot.” I say “I learned to pee outside well before my peers.”
My grandfather was a Special Ranger in the Texas Rangers before it became part of the Texas Department of Public Safety in 1935.
My daughter Stephanie was born in Spain, and holds dual citizenship.
I tested out of 83 of my undergraduate credit hours. Gotta love the military’s free CLEP and ACT/Pep tests and programs.
My mom and my baby sister passed away at nearly the same time. Their services were a week and a day apart. Family matters.
My genealogy includes being related to Robert Wilhelm Bunsen, the dude who invented the bunsen burner (high school chemistry shenanigans!)
I once had to run 500 bleachers for getting busted with beer while on my high school golf team. Coach with no sense of humor whatsoever.
My mom had to call my HS English teacher to see if I should be at commencement. That’show bad my high school grades were. In my defense, who the hell studies MacBeth for an entire year??
I used to be a runner, clocking 30+ miles per week.
I served in the United States Air Force for 13 years, 8 months and 13 days. I almost enlisted in the Marines, as they were going to allow me in right away without my right index finger (needed a waiver for USAF)–the Marine recruiter told me to just claim I was left-handed, and that “they didn’t give a shit.”
My first corporate job after leaving the USAF? Engineering Recruiter for Management Recruiters Int’l (3 months). Averaged over 90 calls per day. Second job? Resume writer at Sears Resume Service (2 months).
My son Stephen was born exactly one year after I enlisted.
I used to be a scratch golfer. Damn, those days are long gone…
I made only one B in all my college courses (all the rest A’s). In Meteorology. The instructor was my racquetball partner; he later told me he had no idea, and that he would have given me an A if he’d known he was breaking some sort of record. Asshole.
I’ve only had one cell number, and I got it in 1991 (one of those early flip-phones that got hot as hell). I dropped two Motorola StarTac phones into the toilet the same week. Also had a Palm Pilot, and one of those honkin’ big Kyocera 6035s, one of the first with internet access. Mr. Technology, that’s me.
In my upcoming At C-Level, I make mention of a survey I recently completed, in which many of you participated. The full results should be available shortly, but I did want to give you a sneak preview.
From a long-range perspective, with only senior executives (more than 20% were CEO/COOs) participating, here are the top 3 issues you identified:
1. Finding, hiring, developing and retaining talent,
2. Organizational changes, outsourcing, merger/acquisition assimilation, and
3. Compliance, poilitical change, legislation.
We’ve got work to do. Changing our focus to these initiatives — on a long-term basis — takes proactive thought and some simple change management methodologies. Change is simple; just close your eyes, hold your breath, and wait. It happens. Effective change management, on the other hand, takes some skill. From my view of the world, 3 things are necessary for senior executives to successfully drive positive change:
1. Belief and commitment. You gotta believe — really believe — that what you are doing is right and appropriate, using a variety of litmus tests. Mid-management and line employees will quickly detect if your commitment is anything but resolute. Change management isn’t for the weak at heart, so strap in, point the way, and hold the course (I always wanted to use that line).
2. Provide direction. Even if people can believe in your resolve, and even if they understand the basic need, they need real direction, from YOU, to know where to head. Don’t expect overnight adjustment and buy-in to your newfound commitment for change; until that real buy-in occurs, they need a really good map — a compass is probably a better word — to help them start off in the right direction.
3. Unqualified support for the cause. Pay attention here, this one’s really, really important. Not only can you not afford to lose your focus (see “commitment” above), but you must insist others join in the quest. You must insist. Help them work through their issues, convince — as best as possible — for the need to change. At the end, though, the change must occur, and you must be prepared to make all those decisions necessary, some good, some tough, to make it happen. Naysayers can be a fatal distraction. Disbelievers can poison an effective team. Misdirected managers can ruin the entire effort. Make sure you stay aware, and be prepared to do whatever is necessary to ensure the focus is maintained by all.
2007 is upon us; we have work to do, and some unique challenges facing us.
Personally, I could recommend you just whack ‘em. That’ll please a lot of people working nearby, and you’d be surprised at the immediate effect that would have on other malcontents in the organization.
Remember, this too shall pass.
Deming said that the system (processes) causes up to 90% of all errors in a business. I’m not sure that, outside a discrete manufacturing process, that always holds true as a specific number, but as a concept, it seems quite accurate.
pee outside well before my peers.”
