You may not want to miss my latest Talent Management Blog where I challenge readers on their definition of Performance Management and recommend that we rename Performance Appraisals to something that more clearly encompasses its original intent. Click over to find out what I think it ought to be called.
Also, don’t miss this month’s special report on Performance Management where you can read more from me and other leaders in the strategic HR arena.
While discipline is important under the right conditions, it can also be overused and misused. In this video blog, Dr. Judy Agnew describes the potential problems discipline can cause if not used properly and the side effects that may result. She also discusses why organizations shouldn’t jump to conclusions and what they should do first instead.
Guest post by Darnell Lattal
Throughout the past several years, ethics has made its way into business headlines, more often than not for bad rather than good. What people may be surprised to know though is that to get an organization to behave in ethical ways, it takes more than good people seeking to do good. It takes more than rules of conduct. Ethical behavior is what is shaped day in and day out by unintended consequences that occur as work is done. To “be ethical” requires a very deliberate focus on the impact, not the intention, of actions. It is also a clear-eyed review of how behavior got going to begin with and the unethical effects on the organization. It requires looking ahead at impact, not what has happened but what could happen and evaluating the degree of harm or good such impact could have.
There are things that each of us can do to contribute to a stronger ethical workplace. The best way to protect you and your organization is to understand how consequences increase or decrease the likely occurrence of certain kinds of behavior now and in the future. Here are a few suggestions:
Be alert to what the longer term effects of consequences are for individuals and for the culture of an organization. The ethical traps, unintended consequences, are easy to fall into and none of us are immune from the fall.
Guest post by
Judy Agnew
We have received much positive feedback on our book Safe by Accident and we are delighted that so many people find it helpful. There is one issue that some people are struggling with so we want to take this opportunity to clarify. Some readers are having trouble reconciling our discussion of the influence of organizational/management systems on at-risk behavior and the concept of personal responsibility for safety. The question is: if at-risk behavior is found to be influenced by management-controlled organizational systems, does that let the frontline performer off the hook?
To some extent this is a philosophical issue. The notion of personal responsibility is embedded in our culture. It is present in our judicial, political and social systems and has served us well in many respects. In a work setting, telling employees that they are “responsible for their personal safety” at work is helpful as a broad antecedent. It sets the expectation that each person must do what they can to protect themselves and others. The question is what specifically are they responsible for? Telling miners they are responsible for their own safety and then sending them into a mine that is poorly ventilated and structurally unsound is absurd. They cannot be responsible for their own safety under those conditions because they do not control them. We think everyone will agree with this extreme example. The difficulty comes with less extreme examples. Workers who are trained in procedures but don’t follow them consistently, for example. Our position is that there is shared responsibility in most cases. Our concern with the notion of “personal responsibility” is that it sounds like an easy solution to a very complex problem. We are sure that some of you have told employees in your organization that they are responsible for their personal safety. We assume since you are reading this, that hasn’t solved all your safety problems. Antecedents rarely do.
So where does personal responsibility fit in?
Let’s back up. The goal in safety is to prevent injury and illness. If we say that people are responsible for their own safety, then it follows that if they are not safe, they are to blame. Our point is that blaming people for things that are, at least to some extent, outside of their control does not accomplish the goal. If it did more organizations would be perfectly safe by now. But let us be very clear: we are not suggesting that accountability (a synonym of responsibility) is bad. Accountability is essential in safety. However, it is critical that organizations first determine WHO should be accountable for WHAT. The word, accountability, is often code for whom to punish. The issue is not who should be punished but what actions will correct the situation so that it will not recur. Although punishment is appropriate under certain circumstances, we see too often that organizations punish only the person at the point of the accident without fully understanding the systemic issues that have contributed. This is not only unjust, but it fails to rectify the situation.
Systems are designed and maintained by people. Therefore, there should be accountability for those who control the systems to change the systems if they are faulty. Once the systems are changed then everyone who works in those systems should be held accountable (positively reinforced for engaging in safe behaviors and corrected when they are not). This is not about absolving personal responsibility–quite the opposite. It is about establishing accountability, at all levels, that will lead to true improvement. Frontline performers need to be held accountable for those things under their control. They should be responsible for reporting hazards, providing feedback to keep peers safe, participating in safety meetings, talking to management when systems make working safely more difficult, offering solutions, and working to improve their own safe behaviors. Frontline performers will be more successful in “taking personal responsibility for their safety” if they work in partnership with management and those who control the organizational systems within which they work.
Guest Blogger: Darnell Lattal
Nowadays you can’t turn on the television, pick up a newspaper, or read a magazine without seeing headlines about jobs and the turbulent economy. Inundated with negative news and experiencing the all-too-real repercussions of a financial downturn can be downright depressing and can easily impact performance at work.
Believe it or not, there is something productive we can do. Managers and employees alike can infuse the workplace with meaningful activity by focusing on behaviors that lead to positive outcomes. The following twelve tips will help any manager wade through these difficult economic times; delivering their best performance and that of those who work with them.
• Be realistically optimistic. Don’t spend time worrying about things that are beyond your control. Focus only on those things you can control and provide a sense of realistic secure messages that, while times are difficult, there is a future.
• Communicate! When hard decisions are needed, make them and communicate them cleanly and clearly to the individuals involved. If you need to lay people off, consider how you can support them during that transition, through community services that might help or via other methods. Encourage dialogue and provide straightforward answers.
• Have a contingency plan. Look to your own level as to where you can cut, reduce, and manage, including your own pay before you begin looking at other levels of the organization. If you are at the executive level, you should be the first to step up. You can definitely share this information, but don’t advertise, “Hey I’m a good guy. I’ve just taken a pay cut!”
• Invite feedback. Figuring out the honorable thing to do when you’re under the gun and your company is in high distress is difficult. Have trusted advisors who will always challenge you to think clearly and correctly and listen to your clients’ difficulties as well. For example, if they need a certain period of delayed payments and it’s reasonable for you to consider that, try working out payment terms with your customers.
• Be energetic in your own efforts to find financial resources and clients for your company. Don’t retreat and don’t become too controlled by what you read or hear in the news. Look beyond the newspapers and examine what you’re actually seeing in your organization. Many times we may find that business continues and even develops, but if we get too gun-shy, too soon, we don’t test good opportunities.
• Be willing to spend money during this time. Even while you’re reserving money, don’t retrench so much that you fail to market and reach out. Be careful not to conserve in areas that really will harm your future and growth over the long run.
• Consider a pay-for-performance system. You may not be able to give wage increases but you can consider setting up pay-for-performance based on profit sharing. By doing so, you will keep the organization whole while keeping salaries in place. Even at a time when you can’t give raises, you can reward people’s dedication, commitment, and performance by including them in any profits. By having a well-structured, pay-for-performance system, you also make people aware of what it takes to get to that profit.
• Engage all employees. Use the skills of your staff to build tools, materials, and resources that you will need going forward. Give employees a sense of purpose by enlisting them in helping to complete those projects you’ve put on hold. That may mean you need to use some creativity but that’s essential because their effort to show up is a valuable gift to you. Treat it as such.
• Be flexible. Another alternative is to offer your employees flexible time for their extra efforts. For example, when it’s possible, let them work from home and save on the high cost of gas. But do so carefully, because part of getting through these rough spots is a sense of teamwork and collaboration that happens when people are together trying to solve problems.
• Be honest and forthright about the organization’s economic reality. Always keep the information flowing. Don’t freeze up on giving employees the data they need including where you are financially, what’s coming down the pike, and what the future looks like. Have one-on-one conversations with individuals. Be honest; tell them when things are tough and are not going to get better for a while. Let them know you will do all you can to make their lives good and that you’ll remember their contributions, but only if you mean it. In the meantime, do not punish people if they need to explore employment possibilities elsewhere.
• Empower employees. Encourage your employees to look for opportunities to find business. Have meetings and ask for suggestions about what the company can do. You might get some good ideas!
• Add fun and recognition. No matter what the economic times are, we can still bring in lunches and have little celebrations of events that are happening, just to keep the mood up. The company can support get-togethers such as going to the movies or taking a break in the middle of the day to go to the park. Try to think of events that will reinforce employees. During an economic downturn, management should step back and really look at people’s contributions. Take the time to remember people in specific ways for what they have done. Make that public, enjoy it, and celebrate even in the face of tough times. Employees can do the same with peer-to-peer appreciation. Sometimes that may be difficult to do, but it’s important.
In my latest Talent Management Blog, I define employee engagement as doing that which needs to be done above and beyond that which is required in the job. Do you know where your employees stand on engagement? Click over to learn how you can determine which of your employees are stepping up to the plate.
Engagement Made Simple: 5 Ways to Test Your Employees’ Level of Engagement
“Listening is teaching and talking is learning.” Think about it. When we actively listen, we are really shaping behavior; in how we respond and react to what is being said and who is saying it. But for those who are talking, all they are doing is behaving.
A new study has been conducted and research findings suggest that bosses are not listening to what their employees are telling them. The study cites perceived power and control as the reasons that they are not heeding advice from those below them. It makes the claim that the more power an individual has; the less likely he or she will be to take advice from others, most notably their employees. The thing that caught my attention though, was a comment stating that employees who worked under decision-makers who did take advice from them, perceived their bosses to be better. Employees need to know that there are ways to turn this around.
Some may find it hard to believe but a lot can be explained by the amount or lack thereof of reinforcement in the workplace. I am convinced that if a boss is reinforced by his or her employees, he or she will be more adept at listening to and acting on advice. I’ve covered this topic before. Praising your boss can work in your favor if done correctly. Now, I don’t mean manipulation. I mean finding ways to let the boss know that his/her decisions, support or other actions have made your job easier or better and made the work environment a better place in which to work.
For tips and ideas of how to effectively reinforce your boss, read Other People’s Habits and check out these two articles:
Well, not exactly but I did have the privilege of writing about the new movie release Moneyball, as a guest blogger for Talent Management Online. Click over to read about what lessons can and should be taken from Moneyball and applied to the workplace.
School bells may be ringing across the country but I am convinced now more than ever that we are not prepared to provide the best education possible for our kids.
I was disheartened to learn of the cheating scandal that is rocking the Atlanta Public Schools. And to further hear of the reoccurring issues with the government’s No Child Left Behind program. More than half the nation’s schools are in jeopardy of failing to meet reading and math adequacy standards. More than half! Monetary implications aside, what are we doing to today’s youth? And to our nation’s future?
It is clear, as was evident in the Atlanta Public Schools fiasco, that what was well-intended when the No Child Left Behind program was initiated has set up a culture of penalty and punishment if targets are not achieved. It can be said based on past history that the federal government spends little time when it designs regulations to consider how to create student success through policy. Little thought of how such a policy, if designed thoughtfully, can shape educational cultures of delight where students learn at high and steady rates. What we see instead are policies that often set a goal—and attach a penalty if the school does not do it.
What No Child has done is create threat and fear, in the administration, with the teachers, and even down to the students themselves. Teachers and administrators who participated in the Atlanta scandal, it’s fair to surmise, were doing what they thought ‘best’ in the name of avoiding the loss of funding they would be awarded by meeting government-set standards.
A major overhaul needs to be undertaken in Atlanta and across the country; and we must look to the context—the requirements that are naïve at best!
Much of what is wrong with these programs can be fixed and the yield will be outstanding and effective teachers and students that reach higher levels of learning. The solution is an understanding of behavior, not from a common sense perspective but a scientific one.
I believe the Atlanta Public School has done the right thing in firing school personnel who have been caught changing test scores. Not that cheaters cannot be changed but in my experience, lying, cheating and stealing have always been firing offenses. The problem in changing such behavior is that it is very difficult to put immediate consequences on the negative behavior (i.e. changing test scores) and therefore it makes the delivery of effective consequences necessary to change the bad habits difficult to manage.
Although I am sure that the problem was produced by ineffective leadership at the highest level that deliberately or accidentally created a system that tempted wrongdoing, it is better to eliminate those who folded under the pressure to produce false results.
The incident reminds me of when I was a lieutenant in the Army. If I heard it one time, I must have heard it one hundred, “I don’t care how you get it, just get it. And by the way I don’t want to know how you get it…” Although I am sure this was never said by school administration, the pervasiveness of the behavior indicates that the pressure was there.
Until there is an administration where leaders understand the direct and indirect impact of their policies, procedures and management and supervisory behaviors on the behavior of teachers, the problem will not go away. When you award a bonus for increasing test scores, you can hardly claim lack of culpability in the scandal as there are people who will lie, cheat and steal to get it. They may think they are working for the greater good—the survival of the school system, the obtaining of needed resources for the children, and of course, their own self-interest—continued employment.
When you only look at results and not behaviors, people often find “more than one way to skin a cat.” Taking the test for the student is one. That slippery slope of how we reach incredibly wrong decisions often starts with subtle or visible threat and fear, not from the ‘bad character’ of a few. In spite of the bonus, I am confident that most people who were caught did not do it for the bonus but because of the negative consequences around failing to produce the required progress.
I submit that all staff in the system is there for one reason – to help children learn. By doing some reverse behavioral engineering (RBE), the criticality of those jobs can be determined fairly quickly. By RBE, I mean start with the student and ask how a job helps the student learn. Of course the main responsibility falls on the teacher. Therefore most staff positions should exist to support the teacher in being effective in the class room. In my experience, most staff positions make it more difficult rather than easier to do the job.
As far as testing goes, the teacher should be evaluated on the number of children who perform to some standard or show significant improvement – not an average for the class but the number who are successful. The teacher’s success metric is ‘number of individual students making progress above their baseline’. Dr. Fred Keller, a pioneer researcher and teacher said, “If the student doesn’t learn, he wasn’t taught.” Local administrators should be measured on the number of successful teachers, and so on up the line. Rewards and punishment should not be delivered on results without factoring in how the results were obtained. This means that teachers should be observed so that inefficient and ineffective practices can be determined and corrected when they happen. The measure of observer (coach) effectiveness is whether teachers ask for the help. Artists want people to see their work; athletes want people watch them play; musicians want people to listen to them play. Why would teachers who are good at what they do not want people to see how they do what they do. They will when they are successful. If coaches (i.e. administration) help teachers teach more effectively, they want people to know and will welcome observers in their classrooms. What this means is that results will never be a surprise as problems will be identified and corrected in real time. Over time most of the observations will be positive as the students will be achieving at high rates.
In 1983, Dr. B.F.Skinner wrote in “The Shame of American Education” that the data showed that the technology of teaching existed to teach twice as much in half the time. That was almost 30 years ago. It has been done in only a very few places. It has been verified and documented in the toughest of schools and with a wide variety of students, some who are labeled as hyperactive, from poor homes, without qualities of persistence, without learning being a value in their home environments, all the things that have been said about why teaching is so hard. These processes have created eager learners, wanting to go to school, teachers who find joy in their impact, parents who are amazed and delighted with new found love of learning in their children and our society that benefits as these students go on to make a difference in our world. What better time than now to do it in the Atlanta City Schools and throughout the country.
While it may seem logical to think that frontline employees are responsible for creating a safe working environment, they are not the ones who have control over budgets or resources. In this latest vblog, Dr. Judy Agnew, co-author of Safe By Accident?, discusses who is in charge of ensuring a safe physical environment and why organizations typically fall short in doing so.
For more on the topic of workplace safety, visit our many safety related articles on www.pmezine.com.
