There is increasing sense of disillusionment among the managers about the average performances delivered by their staff despite repeated goading and pleading for better performances. Do it better next time(boss); Sure, I shall try my best(staff) are the games being played with surprising frequency across the working world. But it seldom works!
Often following five questions answered honestly help identify the appropriate intervention that will push the performance up, without heroic magic required from either the worker or the manager.
What additional information, if shared will help? How often you realize that the information used by staff is outdated or incomplete and hence the outcome suboptimal? If besides sharing the technical qualifications required for sourcing candidates, key success factors for being effective in open position are also shared with the recruiter, the outcome will be better and process much faster and efficient.
What additional specific skill, if developed will help? Your expectations for creative solutions are not met, despite best efforts on the part of the staff; helping them learn formal approach to creative thinking may be useful. Often training is seen as the panacea for all under-performances, in reality it seldom works as effectively. Poor skill gap analysis and reliance on generic broad base training are to blame. It requires keen observation to identify exact work component where skill enhancement shall have material impact on performance, followed by specific coaching and deep practice.
What resources/ additional capacity, if provided will help? Often, we discover later in the day that the staff did not have adequate capacity or resources to deliver the performance standards expected. One of the resource, we often tend to ignore is the time availability with the staff, to address to the new requirement, after addressing other competing commitments and daily unavoidable chores. Estimating upfront the resources required and ensuring availability by freeing resources through re-prioritization and re-apportionment helps.
What additional power/ authority, if delegated will help? Here best is to ask staff, what decision making powers if provided will help improve performance, instead of making well meaning guess. Often, staff is equally fair in suggesting ways to control the misuse of power and ensure accountability, when seeking additional powers. Well defined policies and processes limit the scope for wrongful discretionary use of powers and hence inhibition to delegate authority is mostly from within the Manager then real need of the set-up.
What set of incentives, if provided will help? Managers often fault at extremes in response to this requirement- by either providing too much incentive (even for delivering regular performance) or none (where voluntary stretch is warranted and deserves recognition). Before structuring the incentives, it is important to first identify disincentives (conflicting goals) that deters staff put in their best- from head and soul, and resolve the misalignment. If better performances have to become new habit, appeal has to go beyond material incentives to professional pride of delivering high standards bearing their signatures.
Next time before labeling staff as incompetent, non-serious etc etc, examine to what extent have you considered these five questions and made enabling interventions.
Set the staff for success, and they shall not disappoint!
Reflect!!!
Posts
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think we often miss out on the bigger element: creating a sense of Purpose.
ReplyDeletePurpose builds over time. How do we go ahead? There are five building blocks in building a purpose:
Story Building: Research shows that there are 5 sources of meaning for humans at work: impact on - society, customer, company/shareholder, working team, and “me” If you can tell five stories at once, you are sure to get maximum commitment and energy from the employees.
Energy Building: Research indicates that a combination of both ‘problem solving’ approach and ‘opportunity capturing’ approach works best, in other words, yin ‘and’ yang rather than yin ‘or’ yang works best.
Credibility building: Leaders suffer from self-serving bias; there lies a basic credibility factor.
Mechanism building: Reinforcement mechanism is one, money can be a very expensive mechanism in building the long term case for change. Fairness of process is second element.
Capability building