 |
Newsletter nr. 19 - octombrie 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS - How do we manage key employees in times of crisis? |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
A recent survey regarding employee satisfaction in the U.S.A. (2009/2010 U.S. Strategic Rewards Survey) showed that on average it went down by about 9% as opposed to last year (a time when crisis had already hit America). The biggest decrease took place in the area of high performing employees, over 25%.
Plus, when looking at the causes regarding the drop in employee motivation and trust the first element that was mentioned was company management's incapacity to handle the crisis or at least find some sort of solutions for surviving.
What can be read between the lines?
Taking aside the geographical and demographical aspects of the research, two interesting aspects can be taken into consideration by managers in Romania:
|
| - |
the reason why people aren't motivated isn't exclusively linked to this crisis or a decrease in demand (elements which impact a lot of businesses) but also to the their managers, a lot of the times
|
| - |
high performing employees are the first ones in danger of being lost by companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why are managers a source of demotivation?
My answer to this question is simple: if we aren't to blame, than who is? Logic tells us that managers are the ones in charge of running the business and the people, that is why they are a source of demotivation. What is interesting is that many times, during the leadership sessions I facilitate, I notice that managers themselves have a different perception regarding the system they work in.
I was surprised to hear claims such as:"Well the company isn't interested in us, in our needs!" or "We aren't given the necessary resources or freedom of action!" or "The company is responsible for what's happening to us now!". I in turn asked those that made these claims: "Who is this company you are talking about, who's part of it? What is your place in the company?". The answer is always the same: " Well yes, we are part of the company as well but we hadn't thought of that!".
What is fascinating is that when these people are challenged to analyze the situation most of the times they realize that they are part of the system (although two minutes before they had left themselves out of the equation) and responsible for everything that is going on in the company. I watch, with amusement, how the blame is always directed towards top management. It's an obvious solution, because as the saying goes the stoppage is always at the top of the bottle. There is also a very suggestive addition to this saying that goes something like this: "it clears from the bottom up". This bottom in my opinion represents the edges. More specifically, front line management, those that are in direct contact with the "enemy". Sometimes a decision that is taken in an elegant office at the top floor of the building may need rapid adjustments based on feedback taken from the market. Who can offer these reactions? Obviously those that are in direct contact with clients and suppliers.
What is the impact of this "ping-pong" on employees? What is the impact of a manager's passive behavior on his employees, especially high performers? I for one would start questioning my staying in the company/ team if I have a manager that doesn't have any idea regarding the current situation and is unsure as to the direction we have to pursue.
I think that an employee's biggest concern has to do with clarity. As long as the manager is incapable of precisely telling him what to do and why (or what the impact is) that person will start questioning his presence in the company. Metaphorically speaking, if I'm told I have to knock down all the bowling pins but the alley isn't lit in the area where these pins are, how should I know how to launch the bowling bowl? It's the same with employees that try to solve the tasks given to them but don't understand the same thing as the manager.
For those who find it hard to believe that there are such differences in perception, I recommend the following exercise:
- write one of your employees' priorities/roles and objectives on a piece of paper, in order of their importance
- ask that employee to write the same thing on a separate piece of paper without telling him what you wrote
- meet and compare the results( you might be surprised)
What do we do with valuable employees?
When asking managers of different companies what a valuable employee means to them they answer: he meets his objectives, performs well, has team spirit, is proactive etc. In essence there are two dimensions that people look at which can be simply named: results/ performance on the one hand and satisfaction/enthusiasm on the other hand.
And if we were to take this logic to the next level, a valuable employee is a person who excels in both these chapters, meaning he has great results and is continuously motivated. Sounds a bit like Sci-Fi? It doesn't to me. I think it's possible, I think people like this really do exist, otherwise we would never evolve. And if we were to make a list of their characteristics it would be made of: |
|
|
- good or very good constant results
- high experience/competence
- self assured
- a desire to innovate
- ease in tackling problems
- the tendency to teach others
- the desire to negotiate their freedom regarding a decision that has to be taken |
|
|
The key question is: what do we do with these people in times of crisis when we can't always provide them with work or keep them on our team? If we take the first chapter into consideration, a valuable employee needs clear objectives, otherwise he would feel like he is wasting his time/energy. And here's one of the causes behind employee retention and dwindling performance.
Plus, the paradox that can be found in the professional relation we have with this type of employee is that, when he is really good at what he does, we tend not to give him the same attention as we would do in the case of a new employee.
The reason is simple: if he doesn't need supervision in what he does, why would I waste my time on him, maybe he might even be bothered if I hang around? Unfortunately, the very need for freedom a valuable employee has (based on his experience and ability to perform his tasks very well) are behind his need to have a companion with which to talk about himself and his needs. This is where the need for leadership comes into place: how can you be close to a high performing employee without giving him the feeling that you're analyzing him or that you don't trust him?
I consider that even in the case of a very good employee we shouldn't give up the cheapest and simplest leadership tool we have: one on one meetings. Every person at one point or another feels the need to talk to his supervisor. Maybe at first he just wants to ask for explanations, perhaps later on he might need feedback or acknowledgment. When he reaches a high enough expertise level, the subject of these periodical meetings will have to do with his career plan (or different changes to it), personal development or enhancing certain processes.
Another advantage of these periodical meetings with a valuable employee is the possibility of a timely assessment regarding any decrease in satisfaction, energy, loyalty or desire to perform. This helps you rapidly identify solutions. Otherwise we might find ourselves in a situation where an employee simply tells us that he is leaving the company and nobody knows why. And if you take into consideration the cost of replacing a valuable employee with a relatively new one or someone close to his expertise, you will realize it's better to be cautious that sorry.
So what's to be done?
There are three main ideas we must remember regarding employee management in times of crisis with a focus on retaining valuable ones:
|
|
|
| - |
if you want to have performance, make sure the objectives are clear and understood by both parties
|
| - |
valuable employees are those that also have excellent results and a level of increased energy/satisfaction (don't just look at half the picture, motivation or just results) |
| - |
make sure you have time for one on one meetings that help you asses probable problems or just talk about the future |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| RECOMMEND |
|
| Recommend this newsletter to a friend. |
| • Recommend |
|
| SUBSCRIBE |
|
| If you have received this newsletter as a recommendation from a friend and you want to subcribe: |
| • Subscribe |
|
| CONTACT |
|
Dogarilor Street, nr. 12, Sector 2, Bucharest
Tel: +40-21-318 89 27 / 318 89 28
Fax: +40-21-318 89 29 |
|
|
|
