Want a High Performance Team? Ditch Your Star

Many moons ago, I was a teenage university student, paying my tuition by working the graveyard shift at a grocery store.  One of the prime motivators of continuing to study hard year after year was so that I wouldn’t have to continue to work the graveyard shift at a grocery store.

Now that a few decades have elapsed, I have come to realize and appreciate the true value of this experience.  When we have assisted clients to implement high performance teams, I am often asked if I have ever been on one of those very special teams.  Then I tell the story about being on night-crew during university….

Interestingly, people are always trying to draw the connection between high-performing individuals and high performance teams.  When I tell people the link is not as strong as they might like to think, I am often greeted with confusion.

Here’s an ugly little truth:  Your star employees are often high-maintenance, and may do more long term damage than good.  Everyone knows the employee who can crank out the results, but leaves a wake of broken relationships and collateral damage behind.  She may produce a superior level of output for some period of time, but may adversely affect the output of others.

High Performance Teams exist where the interactions between team members are exceptionally functional.  A High Performance Team quite likely doesn’t have any stars, but rather group of competent performers who have found their groove in working together.   The success of your organization depends upon the number and quality of these B-players.

Back in the 1980s, in the middle of the night at a high-volume grocery retailer, our little team had no stars.  It was a group of guys who liked working together, had a very clear idea of what they were supposed to be doing, and relentless peer pressure to get things done properly.  Our output was almost double that of any comparable crew – and we had way more fun too.

The prescription for a High Performance Team is easy to understand.  Filling that prescription is much more difficult.

Micro-Managing: A Great Way to Get Fired

OK – we’ve all done it.  Decided to do something ourselves because its easier and faster than holding the appropriate person to account.  Maybe you’ve even done it with your children.  Micro-managing – the gift that keeps on destroying.

Every manager has been warned against this, so let’s look at why it happens, given the most common excuses most managers give for doing so:

It’s faster to do it myself.  It probably is faster… the first time.  But if you look at the amount of time it will take you to teach or correct someone else in the execution of a task, versus the amount of time it will take you to do it on an ongoing basis, the answer is clear.

I can do it better. You probably can… for a while.  However, if you insist on doing every individual task yourself, you will become quickly overwhelmed, and will end up doing some (high) proportion of those tasks poorly.

My people aren’t capable. If this is the case for any amount of time, you are clearly not doing your job as a manager.  It is your job to develop people.  Occasionally you truly don’t have the right talent, in which case you have to make changes to your talent bench.

I need to keep close to the details. Actually, you probably don’t.  As a manager, it is not your job to be expert at everything.  It’s your job to create experts, and be able to ask some semi-intelligent questions of them.

If I don’t do all these tasks, I won’t be useful anymore. Listen to yourself.  If you’re that insecure in your role as a leader, you need to examine whether you should be in a management role at all.

The bottom line is that micro-managers sap the productivity out of organizations by failing to capture the discretionary effort of their employees.  They don’t develop people, which is a primary function of a leader.  They also limit their own career mobility by trying to make themselves indispensible in the role they are in.

Micro-management is a self-destructive behaviour, and a great way to get fired.  Then you’ll have lot’s of time.

The Results-Oriented Work Environment (ROWE)

Apparently the most recent flavour of the month is the Results-Oriented Work Environment or ROWE for those who prefer to only work with acronyms.  It a great name because how could anyone not want a more results-oriented work place?  Some of its detractors call it something different – anarchy.  I would probably call it self-employment.

ROWE, in its most current incarnation, was pioneered at Best Buy, and is in use at other high profile companies such as IBM and Netflix.  The theory is a simple one:  employees set their own time, schedules, and work methods, and are instead measured on the output of what they produce.  In theory, it sounds like an excellent idea, and in certain cases it could probably work very well.

I can think of a two situations where it really wouldn’t work:

  1. It can’t work where there’s a high degree of inter-dependence with other stakeholders.  As a refugee of the Retail Food Industry, I can say without reservation that it would be a disaster if employees wrote their own schedule.  As great as it would be for the bulk of employees to work banker’s hours, it would get pretty frustrating for customers who predominantly shop at nights and on weekends.
  2. It can’t work in situations where it is difficult to measure the output of employee effort.  If there is any degree of variation in work processes, then the measurement thereby becomes very difficult.  For example, any profession with case-work (lawyers, social workers, insurance etc.) are inherently difficult to measure.  Some cases may be easily wrapped up in a few minutes, while others may require weeks of research and follow up.

I know we’re all supposed to buy-in to the myth that any and all things are measurable, but the luxury of believing that falls only to academics who have never had to actually measure anything.  Ask a professor how to measure teaching effectiveness, and watch her face as she looks like your dog when you pretend to throw the ball and then hide it behind your back.

The second group of people who insist that all things are measureable are management consultants – who, (for the low cost of $5000/day plus expenses) are more than willing to help you measure everything in your business.  Unlike the professors, these folks don’t believe it, but they make good money convincing organizations to try it.

Should you try to better focus your organization on results?  Yes – that’s your job as a manager.

Should you impose measurement systems on everything?  Maybe – it depends on your business, and how meaningful you can make your metrics.  Where possible, you should measure and evaluate people mostly on their output.

Should you set people loose and tell them as long as they produce X widgets in a given week, they can do whatever they want?  I think that’s a recipe for disaster for employee morale, risk management, and true accountability.

Of course, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong (with thanks to Dennis Miller).

Business is a Contact Sport — Wear a Cup

At the risk of coming across like The Cranky Middle-Manager, I have a couple of grievances to air on how people interact with each other in the workplace.  It seems that people claiming that they work in a “toxic environment” is all the rage as of late.  In a minimum of cases, this may be truth, but in far more circumstances, it seems as though anytime someone doesn’t smile at you at the water cooler, you’re entitled to claim a horrible work situation.

The truth is that anytime you are in a workplace of more than one person, there are going to be disagreements and compromises.  And contrary to much of the hype you read in the popular media, sometimes work will be a drag.  To quote Jed’s dad, “If it was supposed to be fun, they wouldn’t call it work.”

I believe the root cause of this problem, is most people’s incompetence in dealing with conflict.  Many people believe that conflict is bad, when in fact it is neither good nor bad, but merely exists.  People’s response to conflict can make the situation bad.

Some people respond to conflict by becoming aggressive and overbearing.  Others choose to avoid conflict like it was a toilet seat at the bus station.  Both responses are destructive and will not improve or resolve whatever situation has caused the conflict to emerge.

Interestingly, in my experience I see the most common response to conflict to be one of either avoiding or yielding.  Both are poor responses to conflict in almost all cases.  If you are inclined to respond to conflict in this way, it is time to grow a pair and act like an adult.  Issues need to be confronted and dealt with.

It doesn’t mean you are always going to get your way, but at the very least you will have some confidence that you have attempted to constructively resolve workplace conflict, rather than letting it get pushed underground to fester.

It’s a Jungle Out There

I found this clip on YouTube that is a hilarious/sad commentary on many workplaces.  Happy Viewing.

You’re Fired! How to Fire an Employee

Members Click Here for Additional Tools

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

Before You Fire

  • Have you done everything reasonably possible to have the employee succeed?
  • Has the employee been warned that their poor behavior or performance will lead to termination if not corrected?  Are these warnings in writing?
  • Consult with your legal council and HR to determine whether the termination is ‘with just cause’ or ‘without just cause’
  • In cases of ‘with cause’ have you completed an investigation and got the employees side of the story?
  • With the help of Legal or HR prepare the letter or ‘separation agreement’

Be Respectful

  • Have the conversation as soon as possible after making the decision to terminate
  • Select neutral territory, preferably where you can be as discreet as possible
  • Plan to allow the employee to depart with as much dignity as possible
  • Provide appropriate transitional support

Doing the Deed

  • Have someone with you to witness the conversation, preferably HR or another manager
  • Keep the discussion quick and to the point
  • Don’t defend or debate the decision

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

ABC’s of Performance Management

Members Click Here for Additional Tools

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

People do what gets reinforced (this is both a good news and a bad news story)!  Here’s how you can use consequences to manage performance.

The ABC’s of Performance Management

For more information, take a look at ‘Bringing Out the Best in People: How to Apply the Astonishing Power of Positive Reinforcement’, by Aubrey C. Daniels

Activator (or antecedent)

  • Something that comes before a behaviour or activity which sets the occasion for that behaviour
  • Most often over-used by managers
  • Have only short-term effects
  • Cause a behaviour to happen a limited number of times
  • Must be paired with a consequence to be effective

Behavior

  • What a person does
  • Performance
  • Action
  • Event
  • Decision

Consequences

  • The result of a behavior
  • A response to an action
  • What is said or done about someone’s work or an activity
  • An event that occurs after a given behavior
  • What happens to the performer as a result of the given behavior

Leaders often overuse activators and underuse consequences.

Types of Consequences

There are four types of consequences:

  • Positive reinforcement – Makes me feel good about something I’ve done
  • Negative reinforcement – I do something because it will allow me to avoid something negative
  • Punishment – Makes me feel bad about something I’ve done
  • Extinction – Being ignored for something I’ve done

Positive and negative reinforcement are consequences that will increase behavior, while punishment and extinction are consequences that will decrease behavior.

Consequences That Drive Performance

Consequences can be:

  • Positive  OR Negative
  • Immediate  OR Future
  • Certain  OR Uncertain

The consequences that will drive performance are positive, immediate, and certain.

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

Giving Quality Feedback

Members Click Here for Additional Tools

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

Why should you give feedback?

  • To confirm a course of action, performance or behavior
  • To correct specific behavior or performance
  • To have a behavior or performance carry on
  • Use as a performance management tool to enhance performance

There are 5 steps for giving quality feedback:

Step 1: Context Tell them what you’re going to tell them

  • Tell them what’s coming – don’t leave them guessing
  • Don’t just start talking, and leave them to figure it out on their own
  • “I’d like to offer some feedback on…”

Step 2: Clarify Describe in specific, measurable and observable terms and tell them why it’s important

  • Generalities don’t work
  • Have your facts straight
  • Describe observable behaviors
  • Use measures wherever possible
  • Tell them why this is important
  • What is the impact on you and on others?
  • How does it relate to high level goals and objectives

Step 3: Create Ask for feedback on the feedback and brainstorm actions to improve or do better

  • Ask lots of questions
  • Guide them through the feedback
  • Give an opportunity to respond
  • Brainstorm actions to improve or do better

Step 4: Confirm Agree on action steps forward, and determine exactly what will happen next

  • Make sure you agree on what will happen next, even if it is to maintain the status quo
  • Reinforce continued good performance
  • Describe what future outcomes you’d like to see

Step 5: Close Express confidence and support

  • Everyone should leave the meeting with a clear idea of what they need to do next
  • Reinforce your confidence in the recipients ability to be successful
  • Describe how you will support them in their efforts to improve

Get Instant Access to 200+ Cheat Sheets, Videos, and Other Immediately Usable Tools for Busy Managers – Try Out a Wily Manager Membership Today!

Summer and Pretending to Work

One of my favourite work assignments was a project based in Philadelphia that was a joint venture between an American Company and a British one.  One would think the similarities between these two countries would keep cross-cultural issues to a minimum, but as anyone who has worked in both countries will tell you, the differences are more than merely adjusting to funny accents.

One of the first wrinkles that needed to ironed out was the fact that Americans take about 3 weeks vacation a year in increments of no longer than 5 days, and their British counterparts have two or three times that holiday entitlement.

While the Brits would jet off to Southern Europe for 3 weeks at a time during the summer, the Americans would be at the office working the same excessive hours as always.  Interestingly, the productivity of the two groups was about the same.

This got me to thinking about how we work in North America, and how much of the time we are pretending to work.  Lots of people will take offence to the notion that they are not really working, but in reality the bulk of the work at many organizations takes place in just a few weeks per year.

January through May are good production months, except for a few days around Easter and Spring Break.  June through August, many people are not at work at all, and those that are working show up, but really have one eye to the outdoors and their next BBQ.  September and October are usually about budgeting and planning, and while some will argue they are critical to the business, it distracts from the actual running of the business, and often adds far less value than it costs in time and effort.  Finally November and December work gets done, but with the distractions of Christmas and (for the Americans) Thanksgiving.

So as a manager, how do you reconcile that the few people that do show up in July and August are probably just pretending to work?  You don’t.  It’s part of the deal, and most organizations don’t fall apart as a result.  The real question to ask is whether the work being done the rest of the year, when the entire staff complement is in place and working at capacity has any value.

Anyway, I better take a quick lap around the office floor (holding a piece of paper, and walking quickly) so as to maintain the appearance of work, before someone figures out I’m part of the masses pretending to work during the summer months.

Airport Security Screening and Employee Performance

Something happens in an airport or on an airplane every few months that makes us collectively lose our minds.  In the past year, restrictions have been put on air travelers that are only slightly less obtrusive than being bound in straight-jacket while in transit.

At any given time there are literally hundreds of thousands of people in the air.  Of all of those people, some tiny fraction of one percent want to do harm.  Regardless of how small that deviant population is, all air travelers are subject to slow, invasive, and somewhat ineffective security measures.

Many workplaces manage their employees the same way.  They put restrictive policies in place to thwart the occasional employee that may abuse a corporate directive.  One example was a client of ours who had a proposal to put people on a per diem expense when they were travelling, and thus eliminating the need for the collection and auditing of hundreds of $10 lunch receipts.

Ultimately the proposal was turned down because there was some history of one or two employees abusing their expense accounts.  Rather than properly discipline the offending employees, it was decided to stack policy on top of policy to eliminate any chance anyone could abuse their expense account.

In the process, they created an abundance of unnecessary work for countless employees, cost the shareholders more in compliance-related costs, damaged any atmosphere of trust in the organization, and ultimately didn’t stop dishonest employees from taking advantage of the situation.  Not a very smart decision.

In the airports, we don’t have much choice; in the workplace we do.  Managers need to be accountable for managing.  If an employee behaves poorly, then address the behavior – don’t write a policy.  In the example above, the offending employees should have been fired.  They then could have instituted an expense allowance that is easier to administer and saves everyone time and money.

I can already hear the HR and Finance people objecting, but at some point pragmatic common sense must prevail.

« Previous Page
Next Page »