Articles on One-on-one Management and Leadership

One-on-one Management of Problem Employee

Coaching leadership is the most effective style for both high potential and problem employees. The same five principles apply and, while circumstances are strained, the best possible results are still most likely.

When faced with disciplining an employee, to take one common problem among many, most managers resist the idea that the best route is a form of coaching, even though in many companies that’s exactly what the process is called. Despite the name, it gets a reputation as a simply a code-name for punishment. The output tends to be disciplinary letters to file and the amount of time actually spent trying to help the employee seems relatively minimal. In fact the process works best for everyone if the true coaching principles are applied thoroughly.

The process gets referred to as coaching because that is the true goal. If an employee is doing something that creates problems or failing to do something they should the process can be identical with coaching a great employee to be better. The difference is frequently in the attitudes the boss and employee bring to the encounter. Both typically believe the whole thing is a waste of time, that the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

While it’s true that many of these encounters produce no visible positive results, that’s due at least some of the time to attitudes. Let’s review the coaching steps again in context of dealing with a “negative” issue. Suppose it is someone who isn’t getting all their work done on time.

Step 1 – the goal is to see if together the two people can identify clearly what it is the employee really wants. For a great employee, this raises all sorts of juicy possibilities. They can talk about their desire to be promoted, to earn more money, to take on new challenges, to reach new heights of success in current roles and so forth. In this example, the tone can sour easily. The boss has to find a balance of being honest about the problem underlying the need for discussion with the opportunity this presents to look at things positively and find true goals the company and employee share. The employee frequently resents the fact that the discussion isn’t aimed at bigger, better options, but at boring, routine details. This creates something to try to get past. If the boss can suspend judgement for a short while and genuinely ask what the employee’s goals are there may be some surprises… or not. Either way the conversation is clearer going forward.

Let’s suppose the employee, perhaps somewhat reluctantly says, “Well I want to keep my job.” That’s a goal. If true, it gives the employee a personal reason, something they believe they want, for trying to resolve the difficulties. The boss can genuinely say, “I’d like that, too. I’d like to help.” We should pause to note that the last thing on earth an adult wants to hear is that they’re going to be “helped.” People want to live their own lives without “help” from others. They want to see themselves as adults and they want autonomy. Nevertheless, it’s hard for the employee to fault the boss for offering “help” though they may later debate what that means. This also gives the employee another personal reason for wanting to improve things, so the “help” stops.

Step 2 begins with the two looking at ideas for solutions based on the boss’ original description and understanding of the problem added to by the employee’s views or not. The proper approach is again the same as with a great employee. Ask them what they think they could or would like to do to move things forward, in this case, to remedy the problem.

Step 3 – with more difficult employees this tabling of ideas results in an immediate string of “but’s” – why each idea is impossible and whose fault that is (always someone else’s). This usually leaves the boss frustrated to the point of giving up. Relaxing is the best way to approach dealing with these honest hurdles. This is a time to listen, contemplate each objection and calmly return to the search for solutions. In the worst cases, the boss should try the very tactic they would use with a great employee – ask the person to think things over and return the next day with some ideas for improvements.

In a typical example, it’s often difficult to get a problem employee past their vision of hurdles everywhere. This may be legitimate – they just can’t see a route to success – or it may be feigned – they know perfectly well what needs to happen, but wish to pretend they don’t. Either way the coaching approach works. If it’s the former, the boss can engage the employee in true creative thinking. Employees usually see the problem with blinkers on, so bosses have little difficulty in suggesting many new solutions. If that’s hard, it’s time for a break to consult with in-company advisors or other managers who have dealt with similar types of problem before. Someone will have ideas. This is the re-search step revisited. There’s usually some back and forth between steps 2 and 3 till ideas emerge that make sense. A truly resistant employee will never agree or get on board, but the conversation will close eventually with the manager outlining what needs to happen.

A short summary can be given in writing to the employee after this step, outlining in point form the two or three problem issues, two or three ways the employee should try resolving those and stating plainly that it was clear from this discussion this should occur and if reasonable progress isn’t made, there will be further action. By the second time a formal sit-down occurs showing no progress the note or letter will likely end with “and if insufficient progress is shown by [date] further action will be taken up to an including dismissal.” Ouch! What happened to positive? Well, it’s positive for the lawyers and it’s positive in that it clarifies the situation. This is the so-called “documentation” lawyers require if or when the matter goes to court as a “wrongful dismissal” case or to arbitration as a union grievance, but it’s also a last chance for the employee to face squarely how serious the need is for them to change behaviour.

The manager should deliver the letter with a verbal reminder that the discussion was designed to help, explaining it’s important to have it in writing so that everyone is completely clear on expectations and required outcomes, that if improved things move on, or if not, more discussion and action will occur. That’s a positive. Not many employees have the benefit of having things so clearly laid out. The intention truly is to help by making it easy and clear what the employee needs to do. Offer an opportunity for them to ask for changes or clarification and you should be well on the way to officially being positive as well. It’s still the kind of “help” adults don’t want, but legally, morally and in every other way it is the right thing to do. To let things fester until an explosion occurs is wrong.

Step 4 – means continuing to “help” the person by providing support while they work at developing new habits. Checking in with them on a random schedule between formal meetings, more regularly than you would with an effective employee, can help them keep the ideas fresh and solve any minor problems they may be having getting into the proper behaviours. Employees who genuinely want to improve will adapt to the “help” if it’s kept fairly low key, at a conversational tone. Those who don’t will see it as continuing interference, will complain of harassment and perhaps even quit. In about 30% of all such situations I dealt with the employee actually quit or found a way to get transferred out before a couple of formal discussions had passed, largely due to the realization that the manager intended to keep “helping” until things were solved. It’s important to note that they have no case for a formal harassment charge if the tone of meetings and letters is helping and coaching and if other employees are also being coach appropriately.

Step 5 – balancing, as usual, should begin along with Step 1 and continue as each step is added till all are working together. The employee soon understands that this will continue until there is a resolution so they either work toward one or set the stage for departure. About 70% end up being formally fired. Unless they’re caught stealing severance pay is usually given, but the employee has no case to complain they weren’t warned and “helped” so they cannot claim damages beyond normal termination pay.

Managers typically find it hard to swallow that an employee they’ve become progressively fed up with must be “helped” in any way at all. Many feel that since they’ve reached the point of giving up, the employee should simply be fired. Unless these helping steps have occurred and lawyers can be satisfied they have (which means having at least a couple letters and back-up notes about what did or didn’t happen as a result) it’s not wise to make that final move. There are exceptions for employees who commit flagrant offences, but that’s relatively rare compared to the number managers would like to be rid of for reasons of apparent laziness, inefficiency or similar faults.

The fact is if the manager has been coaching and keeping track of things all along either things wouldn’t have gotten to this terminal state or there would be a paper trail of notes and letters already. That’s rarely the case in my experience. Putting meetings, notes and letters together from scratch rarely stretches more than two or three months if that. It can be a good exercise particularly if the manager comes to see that coaching regularly coaching poor employees is similar to coaching good ones and that the process makes sense for everyone.

Surrounding employees typically get wind of how the process works and feel positively that even poor employees are coached and given a chance to improve. The “helping” aspect is emphasized less with good employees since they genuinely see it as help without it being mentioned. Managers often learn to enjoy “helping” employees they’d like to be rid of when they discover that the very emphasis on helping is actually annoying a bad employee and actually helping ones who genuinely are struggling to improve. Either way most people agree that this process not only works, but leaves everyone feeling as best they can about an admittedly difficult situation.

Bookmark and share this post

Articles on One-on-one Management and Leadership

Site Pages/Articles

Blogroll

Archives