Managing Poor Performance with Consequences
Managing Poor Performance with Consequences
Fred, a manager, needs to teach Grant, his employee, that there
would be consequences for poor performance. Let's use a
three-month project that Grant had failed to start as an example
of how to go back and fix a problem that Fred inadvertently
caused.
Step One: Delegate clearly. This was the step Fred did
do pretty well. He specified the results he was looking for, by
when, and what costs.
Step Two: Set a benchmark for partial completion. In the
future, Fred needs to establish benchmark dates when sequential
pieces of the project must be accomplished to insure completion
before the drop dead date his management is expecting. He also
needs to check for understanding and ask Grant if he needs help.
To insure Grant will get the new process, Fred must specify when
he wants Grant to get back to him with the first part of the
project done. . . in this case, choice of a vendor and
preliminary budget figures. Because this is now a rehab project,
Fred can't allow too long a time before the first deadline. He
also can't miss checking in on the agreed upon date.
Step Three: Deliver consequences for less than stellar
performance. If, by this first deadline date, Grant hasn't
found a vendor and started to put together the costs, it's time
for Fred to apply pressure to move Grant to action. Fred needs
to use the first indication of lack of performance to reinforce
his new expectations for changes in Grant's behavior.
Fred needs to ask Grant, "What do you need from me to make
this happen now?" If the answer is anything but nothing,
it's time for Fred to have a coaching conversation with Grant:
What have you done? What steps have you already taken? What's
your process? What additional resources do you need?
This is a conversation, a dialogue, not a monologue, with the
stated expectation that Grant will do what needs to be done.
Ask for clarity, understanding, and agreement on date and
time for completion. Fred is looking for commitment from Grant
that the task will be done. This is the accountability
conversation, closing all the escape doors. At the end of the
conversation they will both know what will be done by the drop
dead date.
If Grant's answer is nothing, then it's time for Fred to restate
his expectations, deliver a close in due date, and ask for
agreement that the job will be done by then.
With Step Three, Fred is going for accountability and
commitment, an assurance by Grant that he will do what he needs
to do to get the job done by the deadline. Fred needs to go for
this commitment now to teach Grant that Fred really does expect
him to do his work on time.
Step Four: Drop Dead Date Compliance. Fred's most important
task this day is to ask for the deliverable. If he doesn't
ask, all the hard work of teaching Grant a new lesson will be
lost. Grant will have had one more chance to learn that Fred
doesn't care if work that is promised is really delivered.
If Grant delivers, great. Fred can take the next step, set
expectations for what the next part of the project is and when
it is to be delivered.
If Grant doesn't deliver what was expected, time for a
counseling conversation.
What is the difference between coaching conversations and
counseling conversations? Coaching is when the person hasn't
delivered but says they want to. It is a slip between what is
attempted and what is accomplished.
Counseling is needed when people won't deliver what they have
promised.
What you have been inadvertently teaching your employees? Have
you been undermining the productivity you say you want by
rewarding bad behavior?
See the articles that discuss this further:
Teaching Employees to Underperform, Coaching Conversations, and
Counseling Conversations at
http://www.patwiklund.com/infocenter/index.shtml or on this site.
641 words