A few weeks ago, I shared some interesting statistics with a group of municipal human resources directors. What raised their eyebrows the most was a McKinsey study that says that 37% of managers do not address even chronic under-performance effectively. Does this strike a chord? Think for a minute about that dreaded time of year for managers—the famous annual performance evaluation. . . you know, when you have to meet with each of your employees to record their performance on paper. As the time rolls around, some managers actually get all flustered. Employees, for their part, often come out of the process frustrated, feeling like their time has been wasted and nothing really said. They reproach their bosses for not being sufficiently involved in the development of their career and potential (45% of respondents in the above-cited study), and believe that top management devotes too little time to the management of talents (59%).
Addressing sub- or non-performance means contributing to and getting actively involved in the development of our work teams and bringing them to perform better. The problem is the lack of courage by managers to “tell it like it is.” Instead of speaking frankly, of putting a finger on the problem, the question is thrown out and most employees are rated as “average,” with a few exceptions. The best workers, the “superstars” (I leave it up to you to picture how relatively few they are) will get bonuses, while the worst will be classified as “hopeless” and possibly have access to a training program, employee assistance plan or as a last resort. . the door. But what do we do for the others, though—all the rest, the vast majority of average workers? You’ll agree that our teams are composed of a minority of very good and very bad workers (at least, let’s hope so), while all the others are average. The answer, I can tell you, is that WE DO NOTHING! We are too busy looking after our top or bottom 20% performers and end up neglecting the middle, into which fall all the rare pearls and unexploited talents that are crying to be revealed. So it is high time to take action, starting now. Also keep in mind that only 6% of Canadian employees feel that they are treated as a crucial part of the organization, while 85% of managers affirm that human capital is the company’s most important asset. It’s as though there were some kind of disconnect, with people trying to communicate but not getting through. The balance can be re-established by the following:
- Addressing every situation that arises with the employee. It is pointless to take notes on team members (when this is done) and talk about it only at year-end during the annual performance interview. By then, the employee will have forgotten the event, and you will spend your time discussing the relevance or fairness of why you are reproaching him or her, instead of handling the matter expeditiously and focusing on the solution.
- Putting every mistake or slip-up in the context of the employee’s personal and career development. If certain situations repeat themselves despite your meetings and adjustments, it is highly likely that the person is in the wrong place. It will then be easier for you to propose another assignment or reach the conclusion that the employee and the job are not a good fit. In such a situation, doing what needs to be done is more straightforward, since the employee is involved in the process. No one, including the union, will be able to reproach you for taking the individual by surprise, not trying to develop him or her, and not giving him or her the necessary tools and warnings.
- Being specific in your remarks. Watch out for overly generic or motivating messages of the “From now on, I expect you to do better,” or “Together, we can get there. I’m with you!” type. These kinds of messages are required and have an effect, but lose their substance if not solidly anchored to something specific for the person. All team members must know exactly what to improve on to reach their objectives.
The management of non-performance requires as much discipline on your part as technique and empathy. Employees who are consciously uncooperative or who deliberately sabotage their careers are rare. Usually, they want to succeed but don’t know how to go about it and don’t dare admit to themselves or to you their lack of competence or difficulties in certain areas. It becomes easier to conceal it and to hide behind deficient procedures, policies, and computer systems and accuse the system, co-workers, the weather, or what have you for their failings. The excuses are many. Nevertheless, there is usually a good base to work with if you know how to draw it out. . . Good news for managers in the municipal and public or parapublic sectors: 52% of employees say they feel very loyal to their employer, 34% say that the public sector is one of the most attractive employers, and 28% would choose to stay even if they were offered a better salary elsewhere (Statistics Canada data).
It is therefore high time to see “non-performance” as the perfect opportunity to get to know your human resources better and to give your all to your role as manager. It’s a responsible investment that will provide you with a more healthily balanced, high-performing team—and all it requires from you is a strong dose of managerial courage.
Nathalie Francisci, Adma, CRHA
Executive Vice-president
at Mandrake Groupe Conseil