When Producers Are Also Employee Engagement Problems

The Diva. The Prima Donna. The 800 pound gorilla. The Lead Dog.

These names we typically attribute to those who seem to have elevated themselves to a level above others, often both in their performance and in their attitude.

Everyone likes a high producer. The person who can belt out a tune better than anyone else, hit a baseball more consistently and farther than others, or the person who has sales numbers up through the roof. We love what they can do for us.

Sometimes, however, there is baggage that comes along with that in the form of personality quirks, bad attitude, and poor personal relations.

They produce but leave a trail of ill-will, resentment, and outright hostility. But it’s hard to get past what they do better than anyone else!

And there’s the dilemma for the leader.

The Clubhouse Cancer

In baseball (and other sports) they refer to that type of person as a “clubhouse cancer“. The mindset and attitude they display spreads quickly throughout the team and infiltrates every part of the organization. The term actually has no official definition but is used widely to describe a player who has a detrimental effect on teammates not through their actions on the field but rather off the field.

Usually, they are one of the best, if not the best, players on the team. They had a huge impact on the field. Yet they often had a bigger impact off the field.

Rebuilding for Engagement

CHICAGO/OCTOBER 2016 Chicago Cubs fans gather in front of Wrigley Field marquee for historic beginning to World Series 2016
Big Stock Photo

An example of this is as recent as the Chicago Cubs. One of the players on the Cubs team was Carlos Zambrano, a highly talented impact player. Zambrano had a huge impact as the Cubs ace and some excellent season of performance. Yet when Theo Epstein took over as General Manager for the Cubs in 2011 he declared that one of the first things he was going to do was get rid of Zambrano.  The starting pitcher’s on and off-field antics, especially in the clubhouse, were legend. To Epstein, they were the wrong start to building a winning team.

In baseball and in other sports, there are examples of other teams and managers who divested themselves of problem players; not because of their performance on the field but because of their negative influence in the locker room or in the community.

It’s All About Chemistry

What Epstein knew was that for the Cubs to break their drought and win a World Series – something they had not done since 1908 – all elements of the team had to perform well together. He knew there had to be a connection and trust among the players. They had to get along in order to work together well.

In sports it’s referred to as team chemistry. The right mix produces the right results consistently. The wrong mix produces problems, sometimes disastrous.

Or Culture If You Prefer

culture engagement concept isolated on black background
Big Stock Photo

In business it’s referred to today as Corporate Culture. What we know about it is that we create the right atmosphere by establishing expectations, treating employees well, and promoting cooperation then we get better, more consistent productivity results. People share resources and credit, there is less negative conflict, and employees are more likely to “go the extra mile” for the team.

The Diva, however, can throw a monkey wrench into all of that. While they produce big, they often do it at the expense of others. They place themselves first above the team and even above the organization. They alienate others, insist on extra accommodations, hog resources to themselves, and demand on being a priority over others.

When leaders support this behavior, either through explicit endorsement or simply inaction, they create resentment for management as well. Morale sinks lower, productivity of other contributors drops off, and the culture we tried to develop fades quickly back into the decaying mess we likely started with.

As many sports managers learned, sometimes you have to draw the line for the good of the team overall. Sometimes what the Diva produces isn’t worth everything else they produce as well.

This is where you can Boldly Lead. Boldness doesn’t require being confrontational, but necessitates the willingness to take actions that may have short-term loss for longer term gain. To create a culture of employee engagement, we don’t just add things that create a better environment but also remove things that can become barriers.

[tweetthis]To create a culture of engagement, know when to remove things that can become barriers.[/tweetthis]

Keeping the high-producing Diva may have good or even great short-term results, but the long-terms costs make it a poor investment for an organization. Ultimately, productivity will drop and turnover will increase.

You could try counseling the Diva, but there’s not a lot of track record of success with that. While they may (temporarily) curb some behaviors, they still have the mindset that created the problems to begin with. Separating them from the organization is ultimately the only solution here. You will probably be surprised at the sighs of relief you hear when it happens.

When Epstein removed Zambrano from the picture the Cubs didn’t win the World Series that year, but their wins did increase substantially and they made the playoffs the next year. Just four years after they broke a 108 year drought and won the World Series.

What’s keeping you from your big win?

How do you deal with the Diva in your organization? What has been the results? Share your thoughts here or email me at psimkins@boldlylead.com.

It’s Time to Throw Out Employee Probation

Have you ever seen a Company policy that doesn’t benefit anyone and yet still persists as a standard policy?

I’m sure you have. So have I.

One of the worst offenders is the employee probation. It serves no real purpose, provides no real benefit, and yet is put into place in virtually every organization.

It’s time for probation to go.

Instead let’s spend more time building relationships that equip and empower employees for performance.

Probation Means Employment at Will

If you have ever worked for anyone else – big company, small company – you were probably hired under “probation”. In most cases this probation is around three months but sometimes even goes as high as six months.

Probation Next Exit Road SignThe idea is that the company has a chance to see how you work out before fully committing themselves to permanent employment for you. In theory within the probationary period they can let you go just because you wore a brown suit instead of a blue suit one day.

Legitimate Reasons for Employee Probation Termination

Usually the reasons aren’t so petty. In fact, according to one study by Spring Personnel here are the most common reasons for dismissal during probation.

  1. Poor Performance.
  2. Absence.
  3. Lateness.
  4. Gross Misconduct.
  5. Sickness.

Which sounds a lot like the reasons for firing people when they aren’t on probation.

Even then, only about 13% of the companies surveyed actually reported an employee not surviving the probation.

Now, a qualifier: those statistics are from the United Kingdom where the rules are different than they are in the United States.

How Employee Probation Works in the United States

In the U.S., rules vary from state to state and, in fact, there are very few rules about probationary periods at all. Many states, such as Florida where I live, use the standard of “employment at will“. Without getting too legal, it basically means that your entire employment is based upon the whims of your employer unless you have a specific employment contract in place. So even after your probation is over, an employer can terminate your employment without real cause. It’s almost like your probationary period goes on forever.

So if you are an employee, probationary periods certainly offer no benefit to you.

Probation Offers No Real Benefit to Anyone

It appears that if you are an employer a probationary period may not offer too many advantages either.

In the article Beware of the Initial Employment Probationary Period, HR Consultant Amara Marcoccia says that probationary employees pretty much have the same rights by law as non-probationary employees.

That means they can file lawsuits and administrative complaints against you whether on probation or not.

No Real System in Place

Even more interesting, Amara interviewed companies about why they had a probationary period.

They didn’t know.

When asked what was different after the probationary period was over,

they didn’t know.

So part of the problem is that there is no real formalized process in place to move an employee from “probation” to regular employment. Even if there was, there is still no real guarantees either way.

So why do we have employment probation?

The policy was initially implemented with organizations that had to work with labor unions. Since there is a level of skill involved in most union-related trades, competence is a factor. Unions don’t want skilled members being subjected to the whimsy of the company and the employer doesn’t want to be stuck with someone who doesn’t have the skill set.

So a collective bargaining agreement removes the privileges of the union’s grievance process for a probationary employee terminated within the probationary period. In other words, until they complete probation it is employment at will. It only applies to trades covered by the union.

So that’s the big issue. Without a union and/or collective bargaining agreement, depending on which state you live in, there is no protection for either employee or employer in an employment probation policy.

Benefits of Probation Without the Hassle

Mentoring New EmployeesSo what if we invest in hiring slow and firing fast. What if we focus on aptitude and attitude instead of solid resumes?

Maybe instead of worrying about probation, we worry about employee productivity?

What would change if we put ourselves on probation?

Employer Probation

Imagine that upon hiring a new employee, instead of giving them a probation we make an investment in productivity.

1. Assign an experienced competent employee with an excellent attitude to be their mentor.

Lockheed Martin does on-boarding fairly well and this is one of the things they do. It helped me a lot to have someone who knew the ropes helping to hit the ground running. When I arrived at my workplace, the mentor had everything in place that I needed. Later, I got to pay it forward with a new employee.

2. Block out time on our calendar for regular meetings with the mentor to track progress.

You can’t be there every moment. It helps to be able to depend on the insight of someone who is having close daily contact with the new hire.  Doing this also means you can more quickly respond to signs of problems.

3. Schedule time to meet and talk with the new employee over coffee or lunch to get to know them and build connection.

The more you get to know them you get to know what they like. You get to know what drives them. Then the easier it is to provide circumstances that motivate them and provide work that inspires them.

4. Invest time and money into equipping them to do the work we hired them for.

Just because they had a good resume does not mean they have everything they need to do what we want them to do. It’s important to remember the old adage here: the only thing worse than training them and they leave, is not training them and they stay.

5. Implement a 360 assessment at the end of 90 days to find out where both employee and employer are in terms of gelling together.

You want to be assured that they get along with others, they fit with the team, and they add value. They want to feel comfortable, welcome, and a part of things. If either of you feels queasy about things, this is the time to discuss it.

6. Set goals for how to move forward.

If employment continues at this point, you know want to set the bar higher. Mutually agree on productivity and development goals that gets the most out of the employee and provides the greatest benefit for everyone.

Is it possible that from that we would end up with someone better prepared to significantly raise their productivity? How do you think they would feel about about you, about their co-workers, and about the organization as a whole? How would that affect their attitude?

What do you think? Is it time to terminate probation? Share your thoughts here or write me at psimkins@BoldlyLead.com.

If you want to talk about how I might be able to help your organization move to Boldly Lead your teams, schedule an appointment with me right away.

Failure to Engage

Most corporate efforts to solve employee engagement problems is making things worse instead of better. It’s an epic fail.

Here’s why.

The Employee Engagement Dilemma

employee engagement imageFor the last several years now, organizations are becoming more and more aware of the epidemic proportions of employee disengagement. It’s not just in the United States, it is world-wide.

Despite the awareness and the efforts to stem the gushing flow of blood, the problem isn’t getting better.

In fact, there are some signs that it is getting worse.

Updated research from Gallup, OfficeVibe, and others reveals the awful truth.

A whopping 88% of employees don’t have a passion for their work!

An almost equally large 80% of Senior Managers are dispassionate!

The cost to corporations is now OVER $500 Billion annually!

Calculate Your Own Impact

If you want to figure it out for your company, try this ROI Calculator from OfficeVibe.

I did a sample just to give you an idea.

Say you are a small business. If you have

  • 100 Employees
  • $50,000 Average Annual Salary
  • 45% Turnover Rate (one local company I know of actually has this)

Then you could save over

$1, 405, 641 a year

through better engagement.

Let’s take a bigger company.

  • 1,000 Employees
  • $80,000 Annual Average Salary
  • 30% Turnover Rate (better but still high)

Then improved engagement will save you

$17, 666, 485 a year!

So why, then, in the face of the wonderful financial and productivity gains to be made with better engagement; why is it that we can’t seem to make things better?

Let’s start with a little story.

Bacon and Egg Breakfast

It’s an old joke but one of my favorites because it never really loses its relevance.

bacon and eggsA chicken and a pig are walking down a street and walk by a diner. Painted on the plate glass storefront window of the diner is an advertisement for a Bacon and Egg breakfast. Probably with toast but that’s not relevant here.

The chicken proudly perks up and says, “Look! If it wasn’t for my contribution that breakfast would not be possible!”

The pig says, “Yeah, for you it’s a contribution! For me, it’s total commitment!

It’s a great story for the difference between involvement and commitment. It’s also a great reason why our engagement efforts are failing.

Failure to Commit

From researching this, the conclusion I have drawn is that most organizations are failing to resolve employee engagement issues because they have not made it a priority in their strategic plan.

They are INVOLVED in employee engagement but are not fully COMMITTED to it.

In other words, they are the chicken and not the pig.

Here’s some examples of “solutions” to employee engagement that I have seen:

  • Taking the annual employee survey and re-packaging it as an Employee Engagement Survey.
    Incidentally, most companies are taking about the same amount of action from it now as they did when it was just an Employee Survey; that is to say very little if at all.
  • Creating new metrics to study employee engagement
    Don’t misunderstand. Metrics can be a valuable information source – if you know what you actually need to measure and if they can provide guidance to resolve issues. Otherwise, it’s just numbers. The other issue I have here is it is important to remember that with Employee Engagement not everything that counts can be counted.
  • Adding new benefits to the employment package.
    This is related to the old-school thought that all you have to do to make people happy is offer them more money and more bennies. Despite the mounting evidence that is doesn’t work and never did work, people still use it.
  • They focus on improving employee happiness
    On the surface, that seems logical. Where it falls down is that it makes an incorrect assumption. This approach assumes that a happy employee is a productive employee, yet this is NO EVIDENCE to support this.

These and other approaches will likely fail. While there is no one cure-all for employee engagement, the evidence seems to suggest that until Employee Engagement is made a STRATEGIC PRIORITY FROM THE TOP DOWN that anything we try will be a failure.

What does that look like?

  • A clear and concise mission statement and corporate value set lived out (and emphasized) from the top.
  • A well-defined leadership development track that focuses less on management technique and more on real leadership skills.
  • A improved system of hiring that focuses on character traits as strongly as skill sets.
  • A structured ongoing program to equip and empower employees to perform with excellence.

It’s time to stop being the chicken and become committed like the pig.

What engagement fails have you seen? What hurdles do you see in implementing real solutions? Share your thoughts here or email me at psimkins@BoldlyLead.com

Oversimplification Can Be Dangerous

I Can’t Believe They Tried This!

Reading an article in the Huffington Post recently, the author tried to simplify the definition of a popular buzzphrase used in the corporate world.  The term was “Employee Engagement”.  They said simply that it was the new way of saying “Internal Communications”.

Wrong!  Wrong!  Wrong!

Making it simple is not always helpful.  In this case, it could be fatal!

The article was titled The Growing Importance of Managers in Employee Engagement by Gail S. Thornton.  Now Gail is a communications professional, so I can understand her tendency to classify it as a communications issue.

illustration of a Boss talking with employees

Employee Engagement – More Than Communication

And to be sure, excellent communication is a critical part of fostering employee engagement.  But it’s not the only thing.  To focus just on that component of employee engagement is similar to just relying on your belt buckle to hold your pants up; without the belt it’s not going to be very effective at accomplishing the mission.

Communication is the promise ring of employee engagement, but caring is the diamond.  Leaders must communicate, but the communication rings hollow if they don’t truly care for people on their team.  I know lots of great communicators who don’t really care for the people in their organization; communication is just a tool for manipulation.

[snaptweet]Communication is the promise ring of employee engagement, but caring is the diamond. -Paul Simkins[/snaptweet]

When a leader cares and communicates with care, real meaning is brought to the communication.  The communication involves listening a lot more than talking.  It involves open pipelines where people are free to speak up and speak out.  When that happens, people feel they count and are counted on.  That’s when engagement is possible.

There are other factors as well; such as knowing when to empower and when not to, refusing to be a rescue boss, providing guidance, making expectations clear, and creating a safe place to fail.

[snaptweet]Saying that employee engagement is simple is to assume your employees are simple.  They’re not. And neither are you by the way. -Paul Simkins[/snaptweet]

Communication is an important factor of employee engagement, but don’t go thinking that it IS employee engagement.

What factors do you consider when you look to create an engaged workplace?  How do you decide what to communicate and when?