HR That Works Blog

Ranking and rating often come into play during downsizing programs. For many companies, it’s the first time that they’ve used these tools. As a rule, they’ve done a poor job of developing benchmarks and they often act in a rushed, subjective, or ad hoc basis. For example, if you tried to identify the top five performers in your department (or the five most dispensable), without data to back up these assessments, you’re leaving yourself wide open to accusations of discrimination based on age, race, gender, or other criteria. That’s why it’s a good idea for employers to consult with legal and personnel experts during the downsizing process.

Once you have your rankings, focus on nurturing the top 20% of performers. Your company wouldn’t be around without them, so give them the support that they deserve. However, make sure that their performance is a balanced one. If their success is due to a 60, 70, or 80-hour workweek, it’s simply not sustainable. Under most circumstances, employees should get their jobs done in 40 hours, and managers within 50. Anything beyond that can destroy a culture, career, and company.

Put the bottom 20% of employees on a performance plan that’s so well designed that if they don’t live up to it, in a sense, they fire themselves.

Find out what’s going on when people move up or down in the rankings. What’s the reason for their sudden success or failure? How can you reward success and turn around failure?

There’s no good reason to avoid rating and ranking your employees. It’s your responsibility as a manager to put people in a position that gives them the opportunity to succeed. Get them involved in defining the process — and you’ll find that ranking and rating can work for your business.

Sometimes we make things sooo complicated. Performance management is one example. In the old days, we gave people a job description, told them what to do, and graded them annually on a scale from 1 to 5 in a number of categories depending on how well they “performed.” This approach was based on the notion you can control an employee’s performance —   and it doesn’t work anymore! In fact, more than thirty years ago, Dr. Edward Deming stated, “Performance evaluations are more destructive than beneficial of performance.” So what does work?

Here’s a common sense approach to consider. If you think I’ve missed anything, please let me know:

1. Make sure the employee’s skill sets and personality match the task at hand. In the hiring process, we have to use skill tests and character assessments to understand the strengths and weaknesses of any candidate. This avoids jamming round pegs into square holes. Assuming that we’ve created the right “fit,” the process continues from there as the employee develops. Periodic skill testing and character assessments continue to make sense. We can match our training programs to help improve perceived weaknesses or enhance strengths. 
2. Know the plan and have a plan. Peter Drucker stated that management tends to recycle ignorance. Dr. Deming said that most employee problems are management problems. The starting point is for management to communicate with specificity the vision, mission, values, and strategic goals of the company and the department. Employees have to know the big picture in order to perform at their best. Unfortunately, this communication generally comes once a year in a speech to the workforce and lacks any precision. As discussed in the HR That Works Training Module on Performance Management, annual goal setting makes no sense in today’s environment. Instead, set goals in writing, make them 30-90 days out and visit them for 15 min. each week.  
3. Make sure employees can answer these questions:
   1. What are the three most important things you do every day?
   2. How would you know you were doing them well without having to ask or without being told?

   Until employees can answer those questions with precision, any performance management evaluation is rendered meaningless.

When employees don’t perform, first check the system. Most employee failures are system failures. Nine out of ten people want to do a good job every day. If an employee isn’t performing, first check to see how management could be causing the problem. Do people lack the necessary skill sets? Are they clear about their job duties? Is your management style demotivating them? IS everyone on the team cooperating?
If it’s not the fault of the system, have the employee own the problem. Under the traditional theory of discipline, management gives an oral warning, followed by written warning, perhaps leave without pay, and then termination. Throughout the process, management owns the problem. If it’s not management’s fault, then the employee should be made to take responsibility. But nobody has a form to do that. If you’re an HR That Works user, consider the Employee Correction form, which places the responsibility squarely on the employee’s shoulders. It makes people acknowledge their deficiencies in writing, what they intend to do about them, and what the consequences should be if they don’t meet their own expectations. We find that when responsibility is placed properly, employees intend to be rougher on themselves than management does.
Consider a performance improvement plan.  Finally, once everybody acknowledges their responsibilities, have a plan for moving forward. Depending on the concern, make it from thirty to ninety days in length, but check in within the employee at least every few weeks. If, after that time, they still can’t or don’t want to “get it” then it’s time to liberate them!

Performance management isn’t rocket science. When people are doing things they can do well and enjoy doing well, they don’t need to be motivated. They’ll want to perform. It’s management’s job to place employees in a position where they are capable of, and responsible for, their success.

Malcolm Gladwell’s third book, Outliers, focuses on the origins of success. Gladwell brings home lessons that should be remembered. Think about how these factors might apply to you or your company:

1. There’s no substitute for hard work. Although much of the book teaches how circumstance and nurturing have a big impact on success, the one common denominator is willingness to put in the hard work. No athlete, business person, musician, or anyone else succeeds without hard work. One of my favorite sayings in the book is an ancient Chinese one, “No man who rises before dawn 365 days a year fails to make his family rich.” (I can honestly say that I do this at least 300 days per year, so I’m getting close!).
2. The 10,000 Hour Rule. If you want to be great at something, or at least be known as an expert, you need to study this subject for at least 10,000 hours. This holds true whether in business, law, medicine, technology, sports, music, etc. One of the downsides associated with letting more experienced employees go is losing their store of wisdom and expertise. If you’re in a “no choice” situation, at least try to have the departing employees provide you as much of their stored wisdom in writing as possible
3. The importance of cultural norms. For example, many Asians are accomplished in math not because of their IQ — but due to their work ethic: how their numbering system works, the precision required to grow rice, and of course, willingness to attend school an extra 50 days a year. What is the work norm at your company? Punching the clock or making sure things get done?
4. The need for opportunity and encouragement. Many successful people have been in the right place at the right time. Perhaps they were just born at the right time. Perhaps others saw their innate talents and helped to nurture them. The bottom line: no one succeeds alone. We all need encouragement and nurturing. This becomes a real challenge when companies are shutting down on communications and training.
5. Once you’re smart enough — you’re smart enough. As Daniel Goleman wrote in his book about emotional intelligence, “It’s just not IQ that matters.” An individual’s ability to deal with emotions and have practical insight is just as, if not more, important than IQ. After a certain point (roughly 130 IQ), the additional IQ points don’t make folks any more successful. Same would hold true for skill testing. If they are a top 20% user, chances are that’s good enough to make a difference. The rest depends on personal drive, emotional skills, etc
6. Pedigree matters — to a degree. As with IQ, going to good schools matters. Going to top ten schools doesn’t matter nearly as much. Just as opportunity, encouragement, support, and other “external” factors impact on the propensity for success, we should not overlook these factors when assessing someone’s potential. Perhaps there is great potential right under your nose; they just haven’t had the right circumstances to show their true mettle. This is one reason that I stress the importance of character assessment, skill testing, and other tools to get past your initial “impressions” about someone’s potential.
7. The importance of expressing yourself. This discussion first came up in a risk management context in which Korean airline pilots were causing crashes because subordinates were intimidated about contradicting their superiors — even in the face of a disaster. Based on my litigation experience, CEOs are the last ones to know the truth until they’re in the middle of a trial. Here’s the point: we must “invite” subordinates to bring us their ideas, to break past the Culture of Silence. At the same time, subordinates must have the courage to speak up when appropriate.
8. Meaningful work. One of my favorite quotes from the Gladwell book is, “Hard work is a prison sentence only if it doesn’t have meaning.” I work hard, but I love the work that I do. It provides me the three factors that Gladwell says are to essential to our work: autonomy, complexity, and meaning.

• Autonomy gives us a sense of responsibility for the work that we do.
• Complexity allows us to grow and learn.
• Meaning lets us realize the impact of our work.
• Collective learning.

The lack of opportunity for autonomy, complexity, and meaning will continue to deprive employers of excellent workers who find it more meaningful to work for themselves. To what degree are you allowing your employees autonomy, complexity, and meaning in their day-to-day activities? How can they get that from you greater than by working on their own or for someone else?

In conclusion, there’s no substitute for discovering the formula for success at your company!

Malcolm Gladwell’s third book, Outliers, focuses on the origins of success. Gladwell brings home lessons that should be remembered. Think about how these factors might apply to you or your company:

1. There’s no substitute for hard work. Although much of the book teaches how circumstance and nurturing have a big impact on success, the one common denominator is willingness to put in the hard work. No athlete, business person, musician, or anyone else succeeds without hard work. One of my favorite sayings in the book is an ancient Chinese one, “No man who rises before dawn 365 days a year fails to make his family rich.” (I can honestly say that I do this at least 300 days per year, so I’m getting close!).
2. The 10,000 Hour Rule. If you want to be great at something, or at least be known as an expert, you need to study this subject for at least 10,000 hours. This holds true whether in business, law, medicine, technology, sports, music, etc. One of the downsides associated with letting more experienced employees go is losing their store of wisdom and expertise. If you’re in a “no choice” situation, at least try to have the departing employees provide you as much of their stored wisdom in writing as possible
3. The importance of cultural norms. For example, many Asians are accomplished in math not because of their IQ — but due to their work ethic: how their numbering system works, the precision required to grow rice, and of course, willingness to attend school an extra 50 days a year. What is the work norm at your company? Punching the clock or making sure things get done?
4. The need for opportunity and encouragement. Many successful people have been in the right place at the right time. Perhaps they were just born at the right time. Perhaps others saw their innate talents and helped to nurture them. The bottom line: no one succeeds alone. We all need encouragement and nurturing. This becomes a real challenge when companies are shutting down on communications and training.
5. Once you’re smart enough — you’re smart enough. As Daniel Goleman wrote in his book about emotional intelligence, “It’s just not IQ that matters.” An individual’s ability to deal with emotions and have practical insight is just as, if not more, important than IQ. After a certain point (roughly 130 IQ), the additional IQ points don’t make folks any more successful. Same would hold true for skill testing. If they are a top 20% user, chances are that’s good enough to make a difference. The rest depends on personal drive, emotional skills, etc
6. Pedigree matters — to a degree. As with IQ, going to good schools matters. Going to top ten schools doesn’t matter nearly as much. Just as opportunity, encouragement, support, and other “external” factors impact on the propensity for success, we should not overlook these factors when assessing someone’s potential. Perhaps there is great potential right under your nose; they just haven’t had the right circumstances to show their true mettle. This is one reason that I stress the importance of character assessment, skill testing, and other tools to get past your initial “impressions” about someone’s potential.
7. The importance of expressing yourself. This discussion first came up in a risk management context in which Korean airline pilots were causing crashes because subordinates were intimidated about contradicting their superiors — even in the face of a disaster. Based on my litigation experience, CEOs are the last ones to know the truth until they’re in the middle of a trial. Here’s the point: we must “invite” subordinates to bring us their ideas, to break past the Culture of Silence. At the same time, subordinates must have the courage to speak up when appropriate.
8. Meaningful work. One of my favorite quotes from the Gladwell book is, “Hard work is a prison sentence only if it doesn’t have meaning.” I work hard, but I love the work that I do. It provides me the three factors that Gladwell says are to essential to our work: autonomy, complexity, and meaning.

• Autonomy gives us a sense of responsibility for the work that we do.
• Complexity allows us to grow and learn.
• Meaning lets us realize the impact of our work.
• Collective learning.

The lack of opportunity for autonomy, complexity, and meaning will continue to deprive employers of excellent workers who find it more meaningful to work for themselves. To what degree are you allowing your employees autonomy, complexity, and meaning in their day-to-day activities? How can they get that from you greater than by working on their own or for someone else?

In conclusion, there’s no substitute for discovering the formula for success at your company!

There’s a major distinction among people who view their disabilities as a challenge to overcome and those who can’t wait to turn their challenges into a disability. Company after company has proven that hiring the truly disabled is a wise business decision that can also inspire non-disabled workers. Unfortunately, ADA restrictions lead many employers to perceive disabled applicants as either not up to the job, potentially burdensome, or a future legal liability. All three of these perceptions are often untrue.

Most accommodations for disabled employees cost less than $500, and the return on this investment tends to be very favorable. Experience shows disabled employees have a greater sense of loyalty and lower turnover than their non-disabled counterparts, and are far less likely to get caught up in petty workplace drama.

You can also find federal and state tax incentives for hiring, including disabled access credit, barrier removal deductions, and work opportunity tax credits. For more information visit the Web sites of the IRS (www.irs.gov), US Department of Labor (www.dol.gov), the Job Accommodation Network (www.jan.wvu.edu), or check with your state vocational center.

MANAGING CHANGE

One of my favorite jokes: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: Only one, but the light bulb has to really want to change!

Leaders constantly face the challenge of managing change in their organizations. After having helped facilitate change in hundreds of companies, I’ve found that there are three types of employees:

1. The Resisters – These folks are dead set against any change. Whether it’s because they’ve hit a comfort zone they don’t want to leave or because they don’t want to be “found out” as not being as valuable as everyone thinks they are, they’ll naturally try to sabotage or resist change. When dealing with these employees, the rule is simple: Either they get on board or they find someplace else to work. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve met employers who will allow one group of employees to go in a new direction and another group to stay put, thus creating an incredible division within the company. Either there will be change or there won’t — and these people are either going to get on the bus or they need to find another place to work.
2. The Sheep – You can hear them now, “Baaaaaah.” These folks will go along with anything. The only problem is that they go along with it with only one foot in. This is because they live in what I call “small worlds.” To motivate these employees, you have to make their world bigger. For example, I worked with one company that focused on the internal aspects of change – never allowing the employees to fully understand the impact of this change on its clients. To paint a bigger picture for the staff, we brought in clients to share their stories, which had triggered the need for the change. Now the change has a purpose that motivates these employees to get both feet in.
3. The Champions – These people have been awaiting change for some time, in fact, they might have even prompted it. The challenge with these folks is to keep them focused, remembering that they still have a job to do even though you’re implementing change. Be inclusive with them, but don’t let them get overwhelmed by spending too much time addressing change protocols.

Those are your three basic personality types, and the best ways to deal with each one of them. If you’ve learned any tricks of the change trade, please e-mail them to me at don@hrthatworks.com.