It has been a while since I visited the topic of Workplace Relationships. I will say, maybe a good and solid 3-years and an additional 5 since being employed by and writing on the topic for Examiner.com. However, I must say, it appears that not a lot has changed since I last visited the topic. Such as:
The Importance of a Cohesive relationship between staff and those who work closely together in order to achieve greatness while maximizing productivity and bottom-line profit.
Now, clearly some change has taken place as companies have implemented effective plans and executed strategies that have proven to work when everyone is on board. But for those who still don’t get it, I write this.
What makes me an expert on this topic? Oh, nothing. Just that I am the one interviewing your employees off the record and recording their true and transparent thoughts that they are unable to convey to you, as they are afraid of being fired, frowned upon, treated unfairly after voicing their opinions and told that they do not have the right to chime in when they are a subordinate; then further having to work in a hostile workplace for having the audacity to speak up.
These are not disgruntled employees who serve no purpose to your organization or company. These are not employees who do not like their job or position or are looking for a reason to be unhappy and unsatisfied with their workload or assignments. These are not employees who do not want to go to work or have a relationship with co-workers inside the workplace. These are not employees whom no matter what, can’t be pleased.
They are your top-producers, your employees who are the first to show up and the last ones to leave. They enjoy working for the company, but they see what needs to be changed and they have an opinion. They want to create and foster an environment where there is an open-door policy for addressing issues head on and meeting a resolve. These employees want to contribute to the overall success of the company. These are your company assets. They want to grow with the company, but not at the expense of being stifled in their career.
For this reason, I would like to first address the difference between a leader and a boss. Simply put, a boss instills fear in their employees and hushes them to silence. Whereas a leader, encourages feedback and they listen. When your employees are empowered to speak, they are empowered to perform. When they don’t feel like they have to walk on egg-shells around “the boss” or the overly-sensitive, attention-seeking, title carrier who needs their ego stroked daily; who wants everyone to know that they are “the boss” you will see how valuable the are to the team. No one said that you must take their advice or opinion, but you should at the very least, listen. And listen without speaking over them or interrupting them, so that you can hear what they are saying. It may behoove you to know that you don’t know it all. And if you do know it all, then use this as a teachable moment in offering your expertise on why or why not, their ideas may or may or may not work.
The employees that you view as the bottom of the totem pole or the subordinates are the eyes and ears of the company. They are usually the ones who drive the business, as the foundation is what supports a structure.
Moving along to the busy versus productive person. I thought by now that we would have weaved all these people out of management positions but evidence in the interviews conducted, says otherwise. It serves no purpose to the company or organization to have a member of management who does not understand that movement does not mean progress. Just because you are constantly moving about the office, away from the desk, on the go, busy, busy, busy shifting paperwork from one side of the desk to the other, does not mean you are being productive. The employees of the company notice this-because at the end of the day, the things on the list of things to do, are still there.
These managers have clearly missed the mark and is the reason their subordinates can not follow them or have a silent disrespect for them. Employees are not learning from these kinds of managers. Therefore, they are not growing and is the reason they too begin to become more unproductive in the office.
Is this the manager that you want your employees to model their behavior after? Even the most productive, high-achiever will soon fall into the habits of poor leadership when they are stifled in this way, if they don’t ultimately quit or give a two-week notice. When the atmosphere they are working in does not inspire or encourage them to perform, and when they can not perform because they are hindered from achieving the next steps in their day because their procrastinating manager is not making progress, they will follow suit.
When working for a manager who does not understand how to prioritize by importance or how to use time wisely; it’s discouraging to the employees who work for them, as they are often handed task of unimportance, remedial assignments such as fill the popcorn machine when you are short-staffed while it would be more productive to be looking for someone to hire, or it’s more important to complete an urgent task so that workflow will not be obstructed. It shows lack of ability to delegate and achieve highest and best use of someone’s skill in the office. Such as: when a manager pulls a top performer from a top performance, when top performance is needed at the time, to have them make copies when copies are not needed at the time. Interrupting them or distracting them from performing, to discuss what you did last night further shows that you are incapable of being a manager.
Working for these types of managers reveal to the employee that there is not much required to achieve a managerial position within the company. Pretty soon, you are promoting yet another unproductive individual to a management position who will continue to produce unproductive individuals who have learned that if they “look busy” they will appear to be productive.
That being said, it’s imperative to know that procrastination usually leads to a Crisis. Time Management: Waiting until there’s a crisis to take action… Then running around like a chicken with your head cut off, getting mad that people are not moving at your pace… panic. There are enough times in the workplace where an unpredicted crisis will occur naturally, to where you should always be in front of the problems that you can prevent. Such as: you know that next week an assignment or a report is due. Why would you wait until the day before to do it when there was absolutely no reason to not have it done ahead of time?
The unqualified will always be jealous of the qualified: So, this can go both ways as we know there are qualified managers who have to deal with someone unqualified always vying for their job, but there are often times an unqualified manager who recognizes that they are in a position above a more qualified person so they will always “assume” that someone is jocking for their job.
Mangers would love to think that their subordinate “wants” their position. Don’t confuse the want to grow with a company which comes with promotion with “wanting to take your job.”
If you do an internal assessment and audit of your skills and determine that someone is working beneath you who perhaps knows the same if not more, you can and should take the time to learn from them. You shouldn’t shun them for what they know. Get over your insecurities and allow the relationship with this person to develop in such a way that you help one another.
I bring this up because I heard a manager say that she does not want to hire another individual who knows too much or a lot because she doesn’t have time to “hear their mouth.” Could it be that they are always talking about what they know, or could it be that what they know is being revealed and inadvertently revealing what you don’t know? Are they really “talking about what they know” or is their performance speaking for itself? Have you really heard them go on and on about “what they know” or is it that you can’t take learning from someone you think it beneath you in title or position? Know the difference.
This manager sees the person who knows as much or more as a threat. Their insecurities will not allow them to be open to learning because hiring individuals in the past has caused them to feel threatened.
A leader and a good manager will not be threatened by someone who knows a lot or too much. There’s a distinct difference in someone who “knows it all” and can’t be told or taught, from someone who “knows a lot” whom is also trainable and open to learning, which you can benefit from. Any manager who does not want the ladder of the two begs to be questioned as to how they became a manager.
They are asking for someone who doesn’t know anything for a few reasons: 1. They are fearful of being outshined. 2. They are an insecure manager. 3. They cannot lead. Hiring a person who knows too much, as they put it, could potentially result in the revelation that this person is more suitable for the position.
Jumping on the tail end of someone else’s success, just to say that you did the work or that you had something to do with it, is not the way to go. Doing this, shows that you do not value your employee, it shows insecurities and it’s desperate. This is when I will suggest that higher managers take a microscopic approach and determine where the work truly came from. If you have a manager that has shown that they were incapable of achieving a certain task, where as after 5-months of them trying, another person came along and did it in 30-days; make sure you give credit where credit is due. It places value on the top-down philosophy.
Changing the direction a little, I want to talk about how managers have yet to learn that it’s never a good idea to discuss other mangers with subordinates. Not only do you look bad as a manager, but you encourage other staff to keep the conversation going amongst themselves, thus creating an atmosphere for gossip to fester. It also breaks down and tears apart the structure of the office.
It’s one thing if a subordinate goes to a manger out of concern, to discuss an assistant manager with the intent of resolving an existing problem with the hopes of bringing everyone into the fold to reach a solution. But it’s never ok for a manager to express a dislike for their assistant manager and carry on gossip, things without substance and have nothing to do with the workplace.
If you are not doing a performance assessment where the overall goal is to get the opinion of other employees on how to create a better work environment, team-building, etc., then steer clear of discussions about your managers with subordinates.
Keeping managers or staff informed. Anytime you are apart of a team, it is important to keep the lines of communication open and this includes disclosing pertinent information as it pertains to what has taken place at work, which may directly affect other members of the team. Such as accidents that another manager needs to be aware of and assignments, responsibilities as well as change in staff. When managers withhold this information, it creates a divide or a separation. When managers share this information with everyone except the persons that it will directly affect, it once again shows lack of leadership, managerial skills and overall ability to build and keep cohesiveness between staff.
And lastly, check your window comments at the door: It becomes obvious to whom your window comments or blanket statements are meant for when you, as a manager have previously taken it upon yourself to gossip about another member of your team. If you have a problem with a member of the staff, be it their work performance, comfortability in the workplace, etc., it is wise to address that person rather than making off the wall comments geared toward that person, while in an informal setting. When you make such remarks in the presence of a whole team, versus addressing it in a professional manner, it only makes you look bad in the end. Great leaders and managers possess the ability to communicate effectively and they know that this is not effective communication.
Now, the hit dogs of the management world are hollering right now. But here’s what I will say to them: “Problems cannot be solved by the same mindset that created the problem.” – Albert Einstein.
—- Niedria D. Kenny, Freely Speaking, Inc.
The post Workplace Relations 2.0 appeared first on Hurt2Healing Magazine.
