Workplace Trends for 2015 #3

3.  Honesty becomes a revered leadership trait.  "Companies are going to start embracing transparency more next year as younger generations are demanding it.  Leaders won't just have to be good at inspiring and educating, they will have to be able to instill trust through honesty."

HRi:  We all encounter issues with honesty in the workplace from time to time.  How we handle these situations makes the difference in how our employees and coworkers view and trust us.  And, every organization is different.  In an environment where employees are forced into competition with each other, such focus may be at the expense of honest behavior.   Leaders should hold themselves to a high moral and ethical standard, leading employees by example.  Promote honest and open communication, ensuring the environment is free from rumors and negativity.  To quote Rex Huppke; ". . . a workplace needs to find honesty equilibrium - enough permissible white lies that co-workers aren't beating each other up for saying, "Those jeans DO make you look fat!" combined with a culture that promotes honesty."

Employee Accountability

I ran across a definition for accountability that I feel truly identifies its precise meaning; ". . . the responsibility of the employee to accomplish with integrity the defined and assigned tasks required by his/her job within a reasonable time in order to assist the organization to fulfill its goals." 

Is employee accountability important?  Yes!  Employee accountability is important to a business's success as a whole.  It is the cornerstone of business success.  A Gallup poll estimates that the lost productivity that stems from disengaged and unaccountable employees costs American businesses between $287 and $370 billion annually.  This is through customer loss due to poor service, high employee turnover and quality control issues, just to name a few impacted areas.

How can you engender a culture of accountability in your workplace?  Through the effective communication of goals, expectations, success and failures.   These are the fundamental tenants of accountability. 

Establish the beliefs and values required for accountability in your organization.  Behavior will follow belief.

• Communicate accountability
• Coach accountability
• Practice accountability

Terminating With Dignity

One of the less enjoyable aspects of my job is having to terminate an employee.  While the decision to terminate may be the best step for the organization, one of HRs goals should be to maintain the employee's dignity throughout the process.  When it is necessary to terminate an employee, here are a few guidelines that I recommend:

1. Consider the timing.  NEVER terminate on a Friday.
2. Always plan out the termination.  Who is terminating the employee and what should be said. 
3. During the termination process, provide the employee with positive feedback about some aspect of their work performance.  They need the kind words!  "Even in the termination based on performance, prompted by the fact that acquired skills were not adequate for a particular situation, the person's assets and liabilities can still be acknowledged," wrote Richard Bayer in Business Horizons.
4. Have an information package available for the employee.  It should contain items such as a termination letter outlining the reasons for the termination (remember to stick to the facts).  Discuss severance, compensation for unused vacation, unemployment compensation, benefits, any type of outplacement assistance, etc.
5. Don't allow yourself to be caught up in the emotions of the termination process.
6. Allow the individual to vent if necessary. After they have vented, allow them a decompression period.  They need to have some control over their departure!
7. Always, always, handle with compassion.

Please remember that each termination decision that is made carries a profound impact on at least one human being's life.  Handle with care.

Insubordination

We have all heard the term "insubordination," an employee's willful disregard for a supervisor's direct orders.  But what does insubordination really mean?  How do you determine whether insubordination has occurred and what should you do about it?  Simply complaining about an assignment does not constitute insubordination. 

Insubordination can be active or passive.  Active insubordination may be the refusal to do something, challenging the directive, confrontational behavior, the use of abusive language or even physical violence.  Passive insubordination may be exhibited by the employee's willing failure to complete a task. 

To prove insubordination you must establish three important elements:

1. It has to be recognized as a direct order. 
2. The employee received and understood the order.
3. The employee refused to obey the order through an explicit statement of refusal or through nonperformance.  

A few words of caution.  Before any claims of insubordination are raised, take a moment to:

1. Assess how the order was issued.  It can't be a suggestion.  Whether verbal or written, did it clearly communicate the who, where, what and when? 
2. To establish insubordination, the order must relate to work being performed.  Always validate that the order was reasonable.
3. Could other factors influence the employee's actions?  Perhaps the employee did not willfully intend to disobey.  Does the employee have a pattern of unacceptable behavior?
4. An employee has the right to refuse an order if they are being asked to do something illegal or dangerous, or in violation of a published safety rule. 
5. The employee must be told that failure to perform the task/assignment is grounds for disciplinary action on the basis of insubordination.
6. Allow employee adequate time to comply with order before discipline is imposed.  You can't ask an employee to complete a 2 hour task in 30 minutes.

Abusive language by employees towards supervisors can also be considered insubordination.  However, you must always consider the context in which the incident occurred.  To confirm that an employee was engaged in insubordination, the abusive language:

1. Was not provoked by the manager.
2. Occurred in the presence of other employees or customers.
3. Was not an example of "shop talk" in the workplace.

While our first reaction to insubordination may be to fire the employee immediately, allow a cooling off period.  Take the time to review your disciplinary policy. Review the employee's past history. Carefully consider all the facts, all the actions, prior to punishing the employee.   On occasion employee insubordination can be attributed to a breakdown in communication.   While termination may still be the correct course of action, you'll have all your facts in place.   
 

Managing with Questions

How do you show your employees that their opinions matter?  Ask questions.  It's as simple as that.  Questions such as:

• What made you mad today?
• What took too long?
• What caused complaints today?
• What was misunderstood today?
• What cost too much?
• What was wasted?
  What was too complicated?
• What was just plain silly?
• What job involved too many people?
• What job involved too many actions?

Communicating with your employees will improve organization communication.  I know that you're tired of me saying that any organizations greatest resource is its people.  But there, I said it again!  Remember, employees feel appreciated and valued when they are listened to!

Communication: A Recipe for Success

Earlier this week I met with an employee who had reached a high level of frustration with his supervisor.  A very quiet and reserved individual, this employee is extremely career-driven and a perfectionist.   His frustration surrounded a recent project that the supervisor had returned with instructions that the paper looked bad and to change it. The supervisor offered no specifics as to what looked bad or what changes were desired, just to get the job done.  From the employees perspective, there was no understanding of what needed to occur or why.  From our conversation I gathered that this wasn't an isolated incident.

 

Communication is the act of passing on ideas and information. To increase productivity, the message must be clear and complete. It has to provide the receiver with everything they need to take action, it must provide the key points. The advantage of clear communication is that people will understand your message.   It will allow employees to collaborate effectively and complete a task efficiently.   The employee won't spent precious time figuring out what you're trying to tell them. Clear communication requires us to be direct.

 

For employees, when frustration rises in the workplace often there is no sanctioned place to discuss (or vent) those frustrations.   Employees may not disclose that they are frustrated or are concerned that their frustration may fall on unreceptive ears.    These employees may show a reduction in motivation, and in the worst case scenario, leave in search of greener pastures.   HR should encourage open communication and feedback.  We should acknowledge the employees concerns and take steps to diffuse the employee frustration.  Always listen to the employee and then categorize the problem - can it be remedied?  Ask the employee, what needs to be better?  Allow the employee to make recommendations.   In this situation my recommendation was to sit down with the supervisor, discuss not just this project, but the on-going communication difficulties and figure out a goal to overcome the problem.  If resolution can't be reached, HR is always ready to step in and assist.

Communication is an essential part of any successful business.  Remember, to get your message across, use clear communication.

Policies: Do the Employees Get It?

Earlier today I had a long-tenured employee ask “What are the procedures for documenting sick leave?”  “ .. . . I realize it is documented someplace but I’m not sure where and I thought you would know it off “the top of your head” saving me the trouble of finding it.”    I smiled.  This document in question is located in both the employee handbook as well as a standalone policy on the HR portal.

Companies devote substantial time and resources in developing policies.  Once policies are developed we roll them out in meetings, post them, put them on the company intranet, distribute them via email, and/or hard copy distribution.   We obtain the signed acknowledgement as proof that the employee received and is aware of the policy - thereby negating any future claims from the employee that s/he "didn't know."   But no matter how or how often policies are communicated, sometimes it seems the company falls short in the communication of the policy.  Are the policies then wasted?  No, but perhaps we need to better understand our audience.  How are our employees receiving the information we are communicating?  Words must always be carefully chosen; nuances must be considered. 

My recommendation, schedule assessments of your company policies at regular intervals. This will allow you to assess the employee understanding of the policies and to obtain feedback.

Yes, you will still have the rare employee who finds it easier to ask HR than look something up.  But, after all, that's why we're here!

Tortious Interference?

Employee John Doe has been working for XYZ  for two years, being recognized as nothing more than one of the many cogs in the wheel.    As a result of John's role within the company, he frequently comes into contact with a large number of company clients.  Then one day, something extraordinary happens. One client, Acme, realizes that John is a rising star!  After ensuring that no non-solicitation is being violated with XYZ, Acme extends an offer of employment to John.  John is excited about this new opportunity. It's the next logical step in his career and a nice increase in his compensation.  After all of the necessary pre-employment requirements are completed and the hire date is set, John submits his resignation to XYZ.    But this story doesn't stop here and there's no Cinderella ending.

The President of XYZ is astounded.  Why would you quit?  You're one of our rising stars.  Those last six words astound John, he's never heard them.   The President offers him more money to stay.  The office he'd like to have.   But in John's eyes, this recognition comes a bit too late.  After a lengthy discussion, John is more dedicated than ever to begin his new career with Acme.

Behind the scenes, the following happens.  While no non-solicitation exists in their contract, the President of XYZ calls Acme and schedules a meeting with them.  After a heated meeting and threats of pulling business, Acme is forced to rescind the offer of employment to John Doe.  John, somewhat reluctantly, remains in the employ of XYZ. 

Two months later, still at XYZ, John Doe hasn't received that proposed increase and the office has gone to another employee. 

Would you view this as Tortious Interference by XYZ?   Tortious Interference:  n.  Encouraging a breach, infringing on another's agreement, interfering with contract or contractual commitments, wrongful interference with business relationships.  For there to be liability under this tort you must show some improper or illegal actions as an intermeddler. You must evaluate whether actions, or contemplated actions, can be construed to have an appearance of impropriety.

For the laymen, tortious interference occurs when a person damages another person's contractual relationships or other business relationship on purpose.  Liability ensues where proof of economic injury exists.  The wrongful interference with some right or economic opportunity belonging to a person which causes that person some monetary loss.  Interference with prospective economic advantage.

 

What is your call on this?  Tortious Interference or No?

 

Fair competition is always legal.  An employee may leave employment and avail himself of whatever expertise he has acquired from his former employer.  As long as there is no use of former employer's trade secrets.

For "John Doe."

Outside The Interview Process

We're all pretty much aware of what we can, and can't, ask during an interview process.  I mean, not everything is fair game.  Depending on the type of interview style or format in use, most employers have a standard list of questions that they use.    But even with the best interview processes we face flawed human judgement.

I don't quite remember where I ran across this, but below is an interesting list of candidate traits to keep an eye on during the interview process. 

• Arrive late for interviews or who get lost (not prepared)
• Bellyache about their current job (negative/disloyal)
• Describe every accomplishment as a personal feat (loner/non-team player)
• Speak before processing a question and its implications (careless thinker)
• Disregard/poke fun at your administrative staff (not a strong team player/disrespectful)
• Use diminutives to address junior staff/women professionals/their seniors (poor manager of diverse staff)
• Use the passive voice extensively in conversation (not willing to take charge)
• Cut others off before they have finished a thought (impatient)

As a closing recommendation, take the time to discuss the candidate with the receptionist.   How did the candidate interact with the receptionist?   What was his/her behavior like?  Pay close attention to the initial impression - whether yours or someone elses.   It may provide you with valuable insight!

Happy recruiting!

Effective Job Advertisements: A Bit Of Humor

For a job advertisement to be effective it needs to provide information that captures the interest of the best candidates.  And yet, it must avoid any discriminatory language that might violate federal or state laws.  The advertisement should provide enough information about the job, including the education, experience and skills that will allow the candidate to decide whether or not s/he is a fit.  For just a moment I want to poke fun at a few current job advertisements I ran across.

For the first advertisement, let's roll on over to Craigslist/Houston and look at the advertisement for a "National Director of Human Resources."  We all know that there are guidelines for employers to use during the selection process. These guidelines ensure that the information requested is of business necessity only and is job-related.  This organization wants a complete profile including a picture and a short video of the candidate.  Really?  Requesting that an applicant submit a photograph, mandatory or optionally, at any time before hiring is an unfair pre-employment inquiry.  Can you read potentially discriminatory?  Employer please take note, it is totally acceptable to request a photograph after hiring and if for identification purposes.

Example number 2 can be found on CareerBuilder.com.  A real estate organization in San Antonio is seeking an HR Department Manager.  The posting reads, "Human Resource experience is not required."  Okay, not a problem - if there was an educational requirement in lieu of experience!  This organization is requesting that the individual create policies and procedures and be responsible for employment law.  There is a long laundry list of responsibilities for the position. As a potential employer, you should ponder some of the basic requirements of the position.  Take the time to properly identify and develop a description of the required behaviors, abilities, skills, and knowledge of the position.  My 17 year old could apply for the position and, theoretically, couldn't be disqualified from the application process.  He does have the reliable transportation, a valid driver's license and vehicle insurance that is requested in the posting.  With a base pay of $45 - 90K, I'm sure he'd just love it. 

 

The last posting, back at Craiglist/Houston, advertises a "2-day HR Gig."  The potential employer is requesting a "very experienced HR professional (2-5 years)" to work with them on a two day engagement.  The job?  Represent the employer on a two day "introduction presentation/session" with a client.  The individual is coached and prepped on the company, then on day two, the individual presents the information to the client.  The compensation for this jewel of a job "will be interesting" according to the advertisement.  I'd run from this one.  But, if any brave soul accepts this position, I'd be morbidly interested in the details!  I think there's smoke and mirrors involved here.

 

Happy recruiting!

Notice Periods

Here's a scenario for you to think about:  An employee's notice of resignation comes at 1:47PM via an email, with the employee departing immediately without speaking to his/her supervisor.   As an employer this surprise resignation may shake you a bit.  Stepping past your surprise and astonishment, my question to you is "what notice should an employer expect from employees?"

 

Let's remember that most of the US is "at will" employment, which means both the employer and employee are free to end employment at any time, with or without notice or cause. This implies that either party is entitled to terminate employment without notice for any reason, unless the termination violates federal or state laws or public policy (and/or unless obligated by an existing contract). Generally Texas Law does not require that either the employer, or the employee, provide notice of ending at-will employment.  In this case, the employee chose to exercise the right to exit immediately. 

Two weeks notice is an ethical standard, a courtesy.   From a 10,000 foot level a notice period will allow the company and the employee to attend to transition details. A departing employee generally has some body of specialized knowledge that will be lost to the organization if it is not fully documented before s/he leaves.  This notice period will allow:

• the exiting employee to transition their project, employee knowledge, etc., onto other employees.
• the employee and the company to carefully review work in progress.  
• the company time to find a replacement or to just shuffle resources to cover the vacancy. 

A notice period may be specified by company policy, for example in the Employee Handbook, and this could affect at-will status.  So please be mindful of how your policies are written.    In this particular situation, to avoid affecting at-will employment, the payment of a fringe benefit, i.e., unused vacation leave, was tied to a two week notice period.   In this scenario the employee was somewhat disturbed to find that the brief notice period provided didn't quite meet the two week requirement outlined in the policy.

Yes, it is sometimes desirable to transition the employee out of the organization as quickly as possible.  I am of the opinion that in most circumstances, the moment an employee resigns psychologically s/he is out of the company.  We have all heard of "short timers syndrome."  The employee may hang around to complete their mandatory notice period.  Despite their feelings about the job they are leaving behind, it's human nature to take a detached approach to something you know is coming to an end.

Resignations are an emotional time for everyone.  Let's all please ensure we handle them professionally and legally.

Management and Mr. Likert

Do you ever have to go through your old emails in search of some missing piece of information?  It's akin to a trip down memory lane.  You never know what you will stumble across or where you will end up.    During a recent journey,  I rediscovered this one small email and felt it worthy of discussion.   Yes, the email is cryptic.  But the message screamed volumes to me.

Him:  Are you familiar with Likert’s management theories? 

Me:  Are we speaking of exploitative authority?

Him:  We are.  Like verbatim.

Me.  Yes sir.  (End of conversation)

There are a lot of different definitions of the word “management,” but for the sake of this blog, I’m going with a very fundamental definition. Getting things done through and with people.  

Rensis Likert, an American educator and organizational psychologist, is best known for his research on management styles.  (And let’s not forget The Likert Scale.)   Likert identified a four-fold model of management styles,  each style revolving around decision-making and the degree to which people are involved in the decision making process:

1. Exploitative Authoritative;
2. Benevolent Authoritative;
3. Consultative; and,
4. Participative.    

With that email in mind, let's explore the Exploitative Authoritative management style.  For the EA, responsibility lies in the hands of the people at the upper echelons of the hierarchy.  The supervisor has no trust or confidence in subordinates and motivation is based on threats.  Decisions are imposed on sub-ordinates and teamwork/communication is extremely limited.  Essentially the communication style is almost entirely downwards and the psychologically distant concerns of the employees are ignored. With a style of “do what I tell you,” the overall impact to an organization is extremely negative.

In short, the leader imposes decisions on subordinates and uses fear to achieve employee motivation. 

“E-A leaders are highly production-oriented, display no confidence in their subordinates, provide them no influence in decision making, seldom seek or use subordinates’ ideas, use fear, a threat, punishment and occasional rewards to enforce compliance, and engage mainly in downward communication.”  Organization & Management by R.D. Agarwal.

Let's compare the EA management style against the characteristics of an effective work group.  In an effective work group there is a high degree of confidence and trust in each other.  The values and goals of the group all link in harmony with each other and there is strong motivation by each member to communicate fully and frankly.  An important factor is that employees feel secure in making decisions.  That is 100% at odds with the EA management style.

The “difference between a leader and a manager is that a manager pushes while a leader pulls.  By this, we mean that a manager uses its authoritative powers to push people to reach the set targets and pressurize them to achieve the firm’s goal.  He orders actually.  While a leader pulls, that is, it motivates people and develops zeal in them towards achieving a goal. . . “    The Role and Effectiveness of Leadership in Team-Working: Abstract.

In closing, I ask the following question:  If your employees had the chance, would they "vote" you out of your position?

Sorry, I'm Not Going To Tell You What You Want To Hear

I upset an executive the other day when I advised him that a tactic he wanted to take with an employee really wasn't the best approach.  When I explained why a different approach was needed, the response from the executive was anything but supportive. 

 

To quote Dilbert, "Do you want a realistic. .. that will ruin your day, or a lie that will allow your ignorance and your happiness to lock arms and square dance to the next cubicle?"

 

It's human psychology. Most times we hear what we want to hear. We want things to align with our vision of how the world works. However, Mr. Executive, if someone is brave enough to give you honest input, take a moment to recognize it. Don't shoot (or shun) the messenger.   Don't just turn to confidants who will tell you what you want to hear. My recommendation is that you turn to several sources for information and obtain several points of data.

 

For just a moment please understand that HR isn't here to offend you.  We all know that in the business world, unintentional violations do not excuse wrongful behavior.   No, I'm not here to provide you with legal advice. But, I am here to advise you where you may face potential liability.  So,  I'll question tactics, suggestions or orders that may appear to be unlawful.   I will ask questions and seek clarification.  I will then tell you what works best based on my knowledge and experience.  I'm going to follow my instincts.

  
In May, Forbes published the "10 Commandments for Delivering Bad News."  In brief (and the link has been provided) the commandments are:

1. Thou shalt always treat people with respect and dignity.
2. Thou shalt always follow up and follow through
3. Thou shalt always remember your multiple audiences
4. Thou shalt always bring solutions
5. Thou shalt always look for the silver lining
6. Thou shalt always justify
7. Thou shalt always put in writing
8. Thou shalt never hide the facts
9. Thou shalt never delay
10. Thou shalt never surprise

Any successful employee strives to anticipate the boss's needs and then deliver them.  Telling people what they don't want to hear is risky.  I can sit here, nodding, and maintain the status quo.   But that's not what you hired me to do.   I'm not going to hide the facts and I am going to provide you with solutions.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2012/05/30/10-commandments-for-delivering-bad-news/

Cronyism or Extreme Social Connections?

Normally the hiring process is a relatively random process based on the selection of applicants.  And in the recruiting process, referral hiring is a common practice.   But there are times when the selection process is not so random or neutral.   What happens when the hiring manager is not totally indifferent to members of the candidate pool and the referral value of a candidate increases based on their social connection with the hiring manager?   Is this where an organization, or manager, potentially crosses the line into favoritism? 

 

In my last blog (Nepotism - It's All Relative) I discussed nepotism and the challenges it may bring to an office environment.  Skipping down that little favoritism trail,  hand in hand with nepotism, is cronyism.   Cronyism is a specific form of favoritism referring to partiality towards friends and associates.   

 

Have you ever worked in an environment where there's a bunch of "good ole boys?"   A group of individuals that are given an undue advantage but who don't necessarily merit this treatment?   Individuals that may be in positions where they are not even qualified to do their job?  In an environment where it's not WHAT you know but WHO you know, you are experiencing cronyism.  That favoritism can be exhibited in compensation, discipline, or even positions.  

 

Does cronyism undermine business effectiveness?  Unfortunately cronyism can create an air of entitlement for those employees who were hired based on their social connection.  They may feel as though company rules do not apply to them.  Additional negative consequences are that sometimes these individuals are under-qualified to perform their jobs (potentially promoted to a level of incompetence) and even pay scales may become distorted.

 

Referencing my earlier question regarding the practice of nepotism and whether or not it's ethical, here's something for consideration:

• One of the most basic themes in ethics is fairness. Logically, cronyism (or nepotism) interferes with fairness through the undue advantage of one person who may not merit such treatment.

Both can greatly undermine the effectiveness of an organization.  So, draw your own conclusion.

 

Always keep an eye on your hiring practices.   We all know that businesses are often thick with social connections.  But don't allow your organization to become too relationship-driven that you unknowingly violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discounting highly qualified applicants.

Nepotism - It's All Relative

"Nepotism is favoritism granted to relatives regardless of merit."   

 

You have to wonder in what world a business owner / executive would think that an organization is best-served in hiring relatives "regardless of merit."   

 

For an employer, there may be a perceived benefit to hiring family members.   You're helping the family member out, becoming a bit of a hero in the process, while potentially saving the costs of recruiting, training, background investigations, etc.  for a new employee.    However, there may be disasters looming right around the next corner.

 

While family members may create a readily available workforce oftentimes they are under qualified for the positions they fill.   And those employees who are bypassed in favor of family members may develop hostile feelings, feelings of resentment.  Nepotism in a business environment may create a perceived lack of fairness in the organization, a disastrous negative impact in which employees may see no career growth. 

 

What about employees who are responsible for supervising family members?  Disciplining or firing employees is difficult enough but will they be restricted in what corrective actions they may take?  Will there be repercussions in taking corrective actions?  Will it cost the employee their career?  How does an employee handle the situation when it's the bosses relative?  Whether or not the owner wishes to admit it, nepotism can be a disruption to the work environment. 

 

Can engaging in nepotism be illegal?  Ordinarily, no.  However,  if the employer hires family (or friends) to the point where there is no consideration for other sexes, age groups, etc, the employer may be unknowingly violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

Business owners - here are a couple of questions for you to ponder:

1. Is nepotism unethical?
2. Should nepotism be in the Code of Conduct?

Rudeness At Work

In my previous blog I addressed language policy's as a tool to assist employers in maintaining a civil and respectful workplace.  Civility, the fundamentals of courtesy, politeness and consideration, are critical to business.  The lack of civility leads to high turnover, lower moral and even a potential loss of business.

In 2011 a survey was published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior.  The survey, titled "Civility in American 2011" addressed civility in politics, education, the workplace, the Internet and the marketplace.   The real interest to me is the section "Incivility Goes To Work."  The study reflected that two-thirds of employees reported that their performance had declined as a result of incivility encountered in the workplace.  43% of Americans (four in 10) have experienced incivility at work with 38% reporting the belief that the workplace was "becoming more uncivil and disrespectful than a few years ago." 

Employers, take note.  As a result of experiencing rudeness, or just awareness, 67% of the respondents reported the need for civility training!  It is up to the employer to determine what is and isn't tolerated in the workplace.  But employees are asking for the education to understand how to communicate with each other and avoid creating conflict.

Statistics provided in the section Who/What is to Blame For Workplace Incivility reflected that the largest offenders were organizational leaders at 65%.   The stats for younger vs. older employees peaked my interest.   Does this present a framework for identifying age-related differences in work attitudes and behaviors?

• 65%  Leadership of the Workplace
• 59%  Employees themselves
• 34%  Younger employees
• 24%  Lack of employee rights
• 6%  Older employees

It is to be expected that a certain level of civility is fundamental to the operation of any business.   The survey reported that approximately 69% of Americans "have either stopped buying from a company or have re-evaluated their opinions of a company  because someone from that company was uncivil in their interaction."  There it is.  A direct impact to your bottom line!

Are there remedies for restoring civility?  Here are some basic steps that any individual can take:

• Active Listening (Listening to a co-workers perspective without interrupting; ask clarifying questions, reflect back understanding of views)
• Communicating critical feedback with consideration
• Assuming that everyone has the best motives
• Remember the small but important gestures - saying "please" and "thank you."
• Be aware of your tone and volume
• Be respectful, even in disagreement
• Maintain objectivity during conflict

In closing, remember the Golden Rule that your mother taught you?  When in doubt, refer back to those words of wisdom (or your mother).

Civility is NOT a sign of weakness.  Civility is about boundaries. 

Language Policies

Let's be clear up front. I'm not talking about WHAT language should be used in the workplace. I'm addressing HOW we talk to each other. Do you have a civil, respectful workplace? Do you want one?  While Federal laws do not prohibit rude or disrespectful behavior at work, employees do have protection in the areas of discrimination and harassment.

With respect to proper language, rudeness, etc., perception is the key word. How does the receiver perceive the expletives used by a fellow worker? A woman who is subjected to vulgar profanity may perceive it as sexual harassment. How does a member of a faith community perceive the improper use of a Deity's name? Is it religious discrimination?

Every company, large and small, should require that employees maintain a respectful attitude and prohibit the use of profane language on its properties or while conducting company business. The content of a Language Policy should, among other things:

• prohibit the use of profane words, obscene expressions, gender-based insults, personal insults, racial as well as religious slurs or any type of verbiage (including written documents, email, voice mail, text messages, etc) that may be construed as offensive by others.

With no guidelines in place, an organization is at risk of being an offensive and creating a hostile work environment.

Workplace Bullying Increasing

New survey results.  And no, the results aren’t good.  CareerBuilder released the results of a survey addressing workplace bullying.  The survey, conducted by Harris Interactive (May 14 – June 4, 2012), collected the responses of more than 3,800 workers nationwide.  The survey found that 35% of the respondents admitted they felt bullied on the job.  Unfortunately, that’s an 8% increase from last year.    

Bullies are found at all levels of the organization. The largest offender?  The boss at 48% followed by co-workers at 45%.  In a 2005 survey, when participants were asked to identify factors "which impair their organization's ability to deal effectively with bullying, the most commonly cited factors were management's unwillingness to acknowledge that a problem exists, and the prevailing management style."   Where are we 7 years later?  We acknowledge that a problem exists, but we're not making much headway in solving the problem. 

Bullying takes many forms:

• applying different standards to different people;
• constant criticism;
• ignoring an employee;
• false accusations of mistakes.

No matter what shape or form bullying takes, it can cause more harm that just hurt feelings.   Seventeen percent of the respondents to the survey indicated that they quit their jobs to escape the situation.  Sixteen percent said they suffered health-related problems as a result of being the target.

CareerBuilder released the results of their survey for Canadian employees on August 29^th.  How did our neighbors to the North do?  Of the 552 full-time employed Canadians, 45% of respondents said they were bullied.  The source:  24% coworkers, 23% immediate boss, 17% higher manager.  Twenty six percent of the bullied workers stopped their bullying by quitting their jobs.  A larger survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute indicated that 28% of the targets voluntarily quit, but another 25% quit after being forced out (constructive discharge).

The Workplace Bullying Institute defines bullying as "repeated, health-harming, mistreatment of one or more persons (the targets) by one or more perpetrators. .. . ".   Workplace bullying may violate an organizations ethics standards, company policies or even the law.   Review your policies.  Has anyone in your workplace been subjected to bullying?  What steps have you taken to eradicate bullying from your workplace?

 

 

Office Politics. Is Survival Possible?

Organizational politics refers to behaviors “that occur on an informal basis within an organization and involve intentional acts of influence that are designed to protect or enhance individuals’ professional careers when conflicting courses of action are possible” (Drory, 1993; Porter, Allen, & Angle, 1981).

Politics are the unseen elephant in the living room. We know it’s there, it’s just difficult to define and describe. And politics, seen or not, have a long-term negative affect on the organization and ultimately, organizational outcomes are damaged.  I have provided examples below of some the more obvious results of politics: 

1. Environment: Politics lead to a negative environment; spoiling relationships among individuals.   The overall climate of the organization may have an influence on an employees’ performance through mistrust, threats, defensiveness, low support, and/or poor communication.
2. Demotivator: No matter how much hard work an employee puts in, it goes unnoticed in a politically driven organization.  The employee who works hard is not rewarded suitably versus the non performer who is rewarded due to politics (favoritism rather than merit determines who gets ahead).
3. Increased Stress:  Politics increase the stress levels of employees (mistrust, threats, defensiveness, etc.). 
4. Information: Information is manipulated and either not passed on in its desired form, or is withheld. Managers/Supervisors have an incorrect view of what is happening in the organization.
5. Turnover (Organizational Commitment):  An employees’ desire to remain in the organization and/or willingness to exert effort on behalf of the organization are greatly impacted by politics and behaviors. 

R. Buckminster Fuller (Critical Path) said that rather than attempting to teach people the right things to do, one should design organizations such that doing the right things was simply the path of least resistance.   Good advice.

Here's some ideas to help you survive a politically driven environment:

• Maintain your composure.
• Have those “hard” conversations and make your case.  The truth is hard to resist (however, there may be some harm to the messenger).
• Be the best you can be.
• Never join other voices to persecute the establishment.
• Never join hands to persecute a co-worker.
• Learn to know each co-worker individually and not base a relationship on gossip.

 

Top 25 Signs of a Dysfunctional Workplace

Ran across this great article from 2008, Top 25 Signs of a Dysfunctional Workplace.  Published by HR World, I thought I'd share some of my personal highlights.  For the full article, the link has been provided. 

 

http://www.hrworld.com/features/25-signs-dysfunctional-workplace

1.  Nothing gets done without the bosses approval.  (Bottleneck anyone?) 

2.  Nothing can get done unless employees go behind the bosses back.  (If "it" works - you're gold.  If not, see #16 below.)

3.  No one is sure who the boss really is.

10.  Reward system?  What reward system?  (You can't have a stick and no carrot!)

16.  "Wall of Shame."  (Boss openly chastises employees in public.) 

21.  What matters is not what you've accomplished in a day, but how many hours you were seen "working."  (Let's reward productivity, not time spent in the office.)

25.  No one ever gets fired, no matter how ineffective they are at their job.  (Would someone please explain this to me????)