[Human resources] Unsatisfactory work

 "I want my employees to be happy.”

 “I don’t want to upset my employees.”

“I don’t want conflict.”

I frequently hear supervisors make these comments. More often, I see these statements reflected in supervisor’s actions and inactions. Although none of these statements are wrong necessarily, they often lead to inappropriate supervisory techniques. These statements typically reflect a desire by supervisors to be nice to their employees and keep them happy.

There’s nothing wrong with these feelings. However, “nice” and “happy” shouldn’t be the primary value or only desired outcome of great supervision. The primary value should be “fair,” and the primary desired outcome should be extraordinary job satisfaction. Research and supervisory experience show just being nice to employees and seeking to make them happy don’t result in superior productivity.

The following three statements are better than the ones in the first paragraph:
• The critical value in supervisory relationships is fairness.
• A great supervisory relationship requires building trust.
• Great supervisors mold employees to have superior productivity and extraordinary job satisfaction.

Managers striving to be great supervisors often use niceness as the most important value to enable their employees to be happy. Being fair, however, involves more than just being nice. I’m not suggesting you be unkind to your employees, but fairness and exceptional supervision require more than just being nice.

Fairness should be the key value for all supervisory actions, but it’s perhaps most important – and the most difficult – to implement when dealing with unsatisfactory performance. The seemingly nice and easy response to unsatisfactory performance is to ignore it. This is very common when the performance is “not that bad” or the employee is “trying.”

This response, although common, isn’t fair. First, it’s not fair to the golf course. You hired the employee to perform, and that’s not happening. Second, it’s not fair to the other employees who are performing satisfactorily. Third, it’s not fair to the employee. Are you really helping them by allowing them to fail? The challenge is to provide a response to unsatisfactory performance that you and the employee believe is fair.

The experience of employee management experts is that an employee generally perceives that he has been treated unfairly when:
• The expected level of performance wasn’t clearly specified in advance. This is referred to as a failure to “chalk the field” so the employee knows the rules.
• The failure to perform satisfactorily was caused by the situation rather than by  effort, focus, concentration, etc.

The key to responding fairly to unsatisfactory performance is to determine whether it was a result of the situation/context of the performance: inadequate training, unsatisfactory support, unrealistically high performance expectations or unexpected factors not under the control of the employee. In these cases, the employee’s behavior isn’t the cause. Or, was the unsatisfactory performance the result of inadequate effort, focus, concentration, determination, etc.? Then, the employee’s behavior is the cause.

The root cause of the problem is the $64,000 question. Often, the supervisor and employee have different perceptions of the cause, exacerbated by the absence of clear performance expectations.

There are four possible perceptions of the cause and four different correct responses by the supervisor:
1. The supervisor and employee perceive the situation/context is the cause.
2. The supervisor and employee perceive the employee’s behavior is the cause.
3. The supervisor perceives the situation/context is the cause, and the employee perceives his behavior is the cause.
4. The supervisor perceives the employee’s behavior is the cause, and the employee perceives the situation/context is the cause.

Let’s consider what constitutes fairness in each situation:

1. Fairness dictates redirection feedback for this situation. The employee’s behaviors are to be applauded, but the performance isn’t satisfactory and must be redirected. The employee is trying but not succeeding. Although simply applauding the effort by being nice is often an appealing response, it’s not fair because unsatisfactory performance likely will continue. Redirection feedback is used to convey to the employee:
• He’s not at fault. It’s crucial the employee not feel he’s being punished. Instead, you’re committing to work with the employee to achieve successful performance.
• The performance isn’t acceptable.
• The required changes in the context to enable successful performance. Training, coaching and encouragement are required.

2. Fairness dictates negative feedback for this situation. Although providing negative feedback is rarely easy, the chore is much easier because the employee recognizes his behavior is the cause of the unsatisfactory performance. Negative feedback is used to convey to the employee that:
• The performance isn’t acceptable, and change is expected.
• The consequence – absence of positive feedback, reminder, reprimand, punishment – must produce sufficient pain to cause a change in behavior.

3. This is an unlikely situation. It could occur with an employee who lacks self-confidence and experience. Redirection feedback is required, with great emphasis on making the changes to enable the employee to succeed.

4. Failure to specify performance expectations clearly greatly increases the likelihood of this dangerous response to unsatisfactory performance. This is important. It’s common because human nature leads us to blame the situation when we err and when we’re evaluating the other person. It also has the greatest potential for dramatically diminishing the supervisor/employee relationship.

The first step in this situation is for the supervisor to re-evaluate the situation carefully to be certain the situation/context isn’t the cause of the unsatisfactory performance. If the situation/context is or might be the problem, redirection feedback should be used. If the supervisor is certain negative feedback is needed, it must be provided carefully. The performance discussion must begin by trying to guide the employee to recognize the situation isn’t the cause of the unsatisfactory performance. The behavior is the problem.

Being fair is the key to supervisory success. Just being nice is well-intentioned but often counterproductive. GCN