Wow!

Last weekend, my wife & I had been to Pizza Hut for dinner. Oh yes, Pizza is considered dinner when you don’t have too many options. We got to our table and were given the menu card to place an order. All along the guy serving us was doing everything that was expected of his job; attentive, polite, courte, well-mannered and multi-tasking. All along he was a good listener and kept up with the pace in the place. We got served some tasty pizza and then came the surprise of the evening! Time for the check/bill. No, I’m not going to complain about the cost or taxes or any such thing…go ahead and have a look at the bill.

Wow! Just. Wow. This was absolutely wonderful and it’s got a personal touch. To be honest, this happened the second time around (last time was a few months back). Hence, it deserves this time and space on the blog!

Are you a manager wondering how to identify top talent within your team?

This display of ‘wow’ right here should act as an example. There were at least 8 other people serving tables at the place. Among them this was a stand-out performance. He didn’t need to do anything different, rather was not required of his role to do anything different. Yet, he chose to go the extra mile, take the extra step and deliver awesome customer experience.

Entrepreneurial instincts

Here’s a question that I’d recently asked on Twitter.

Does HR value people with entrepreneurial instincts ? Or do we try and fit square pegs in round holes?

Surprisingly, I got consistent replies from across geographies. The answer was – No, HR doesn’t value entrepreneurial instincts. We try and fit square pegs in round holes. There are multiple answers to this question. Some may work, others might not. Some have the required flexibility, while others deal with rigidity.

As clichéd as it sounds, entrepreneurs are a rare breed. They come with characteristics and traits that differ a lot from most people. Traits include (but not limited to): high competency, high levels of risk taking, high self confidence and very competitive, creative bent of mind, innovative spirit, proactive behavior and need for freedom at workplace.

Given that we know certain traits of an entrepreneur it brings me to ask a couple of questions:

What can HR do to value entrepreneurial instincts?

• To start with, it can improve the talent management system in the organization that gives flexibility to entrepreneurs to choose their career paths.
  
• Map the entrepreneurial traits identified and create performance management systems that include innovation at the center of the review. Look towards the results achieved rather than the approach.
  
• Encourage and train managers to accept or have for a higher tolerance for failure. Not all entrepreneurial ideas will take off.
  
• Get the recruiters to hire right. If the Company doesn’t have a culture that supports entrepreneurship, then it doesn’t make sense to get someone who will eventually leave you just as quickly. It’s critical to identify what’s needed for the role.
  
• Work closely with managers to indentify what percentage of their workforce needs to be entrepreneurs. Not everyone needs to be an entrepreneur.
  
• Have a robust feedback system. Entrepreneurs need to be given feedback on a regular basis.
  
• Bring in transparency into the performance review system. Employees need to know the parameters that define the role of an entrepreneur. However, there’s a catch to this approach. You cannot have performance review processes that make it mandatory for innovation! It’ll back-fire big time, since this approach will ask employees to take up roles that they aren’t comfortable with.
  
• Promote the jobs internally within the organization and then share it with the outside world. Employees must be encouraged, based on their competencies, to take up roles that require innovation. And they’ll appreciate the role was shared with them first.
  
• Money matters. Even to that entrepreneur who tells you that he wants freedom for innovation above all else. Really. Pay structures need to be flexible depending on the role that one play’s in the Company. Entrepreneurs should have a high incentive plan, that’s directly linked to their performance. Better performance means more money.

Why doesn’t HR value entrepreneurship instincts in employees?

• The challenge is not in accepting the need for entrepreneurship within the Company. It’s the lack awareness on how to make the fit happen. The need to look for a way to fit in innovation, risks and costs involved, are a bigger challenge. There’s already a team in place and business has defined its goals and objectives. Challenging status quo in a process oriented Company might not work in the best interest of the Company.
  
• Company culture plays an important role for hiring/retaining entrepreneurs. If the culture doesn’t support the system to fit in entrepreneurs, then it’s a disservice to both the candidate and the Company to come together to work.
  
• HR might not have been given the authority to take the call on hiring entrepreneurs. It means that HR/recruiter will eventually fall back on the hiring manager who’ll make the decision.
  
• Lack of transparency might make it really hard to determine if the Company really needs an entrepreneur. If not, not amount of talking/incentives/promises will keep them back.
  
• It could also be a result of of not identifying the candidate's entrepreneurial instinct at the hiring stage.

What’s your take? Your replies will give some food-for-thought to HR readers of this blog.

Obvious or Curious?

Well, before I start with this post, I want to ask you to read through the dictionary meaning of a couple of words, at least the one explanation that makes sense in this context.

Read up here on obvious and curious.

Now that we have, let’s get down to the post. This one’s really got me thinking.

• Does good talent take jobs that state the obvious? Or ones that leave them a bit curious?


• Do employees like reading a user manual (obvious) before using the intranet/HRIS? Or will they use it better if you create curiosity about the application?


• Can managers retain the best folks by opting for a natural career progression for everyone? Or will a few of them opt for a more risky career path if they find something curious?


• Is that sales person pitching your product in the way that’s sounds obvious? Or is he willing to create some curiosity in the customer & let him try it out first?

If you still haven’t answered truthfully, then maybe this post won’t have an impact on you. Cause the answer is screaming at us. Most of us (at least starting with me and many that I know personally) including talent, managers, sales folks, marketing honchos, customers & even the front desk receptionist, among so many others, love stuff that tickles brain-cells. We are constantly looking for something that conveys curiosity, stuff that’s compelling enough to take on the risk. It’s a battle of the obvious versus curious choice. Before you jump at a conclusion, it’s OK to take a side. Go ahead and pick your choice. It’s perfectly alright.

It only starts getting murky when the leader picks obvious and implements it without considering the curious set of people. Towing the line is then, the only option. However, repercussions of this will be experienced when the market picks up and the curious lot will be find jobs that suit them better.

So what’s this choice got to do with HR, staffing or employee relations? It does mean a lot. In fact it means creating a work environment with a difference.

The obvious choice is to play it safe. Create enough policies so that HR doesn’t need to answer any questions. Make the hiring process predictable enough to hire mediocre candidates. Rate every employee as a high-performer and not worry about the side-effects until it happens (like a lay off). Follow industry benchmarking even when you know you can do much better. Implement processes that doesn’t give room for people to question or improvise.

On the other hand, you have curious. It has people who like to question status quo. They take the time & effort to find alternate solutions. They’re inquisitive by nature and are constantly looking at raising the bar. Setting new standards in benchmarking is a norm. Willing to take risks and they are fully aware of the repercussions and have solutions for that too. Curious is always ready to engage employees in an open manner and strive towards creating an inclusive work culture.

If you are in HR and are telling me that allowing curious is a culture thing or is a numbers driven issue at a very big organization, I’ll strongly disagree. If it were that, the curious lot would have left you in their very first month on the job! Really. I suppose it’s then an individual trait. Some managers are allowing for it to grow, while many others are curbing it at the very start. As a HR person, are you having discussions with the business to allow for that curious mind to grow? That’s the HR power that you will bring to the table. Start with one and you’ll be surprised that there are more people than you can think of in your company who’ll endorse that view.

So when will you start?

Are you assertive enough at work?

Well, I was recently part of a discussion with a group of friends from a variety of work background. We had someone from engineering, HR, recruitment, sales, consulting, among others. The topic discussed was about being assertive.

The question we shared among the group was: Are you assertive enough at work?

The question was directed more towards their life at work than in personal life. While the entire group started out saying we were assertive, the real truth emerged only after sometime into the discussion. As much as we wanted to debate, we really weren’t assertive enough in our work life!! The dude in engineering wasn’t assertive when he told he sure wasn’t going to meet the product release deadline. The sales guy wasn’t assertive enough to tell a No to his client’s demands, fearing he might lose them. The recruiter wasn’t assertive when it counted the most, in telling the hiring manager to take a decision with the existing bunch of candidates. That the grass wasn’t greener on the other side of the candidate field. HR often ended up quoting stuff from policies, rather than a firm ‘No’ to crazy requests from employees (fearing attrition!)

Another obvious question asked was, do we then really need to be assertive? Off course we should be assertive. Isn’t that obvious? Being assertive really isn’t about forcing an idea on someone, pushing so hard that it forms cracks in a client relationship, does not mean you hide behind a HR policy instead of answering the question openly. It’s about being confident and not giving up on yourself when you know the outcome of a certain activity. Being decisive in your ‘No’ with valid reasons. If you choose to be assertive, you have then are decided to speak firmly about how you feel about a situation. It’s a thin between aggressiveness and assertiveness, striking a balance is the tough part.

There’s a ton of information on the web, telling/asking/showing/advising us on how to be assertive? Just what are we doing with that information? From our discussions, it was clear that most of that info got thrown to the backburner in a never ending rush to deliver results, please unrelenting clients and hire the next-best candidate.

So is being assertive a personality trait or one that we learn on the job? If we agree that circumstances reveal a person, is it then really possible to teach someone to be assertive (thinking on the spot rather than after the event has occurred)?

That gets me to ask you: Are you assertive enough at work? How do you manage to stay that way? Do share your thoughts.

Manager asking for too many reports without sufficient notice

From a reader;

I work as an analyst and part of my job description requires me to prepare/generate reports on a regular basis. I’ve a weekly schedule that is planned way in advance and it helps me to prioritize my work such that deliverables aren’t affected. This mode worked great with my previous manager who has since left the Company. I now report to a new manager and I’m finding it difficult to adapt to his style of working. He’s ok with my weekly schedules and has been very supportive at work. However, I’ve noticed many times that he has asked for too many reports (not in the weekly schedule) without giving sufficient notice. The requests are mostly from clients who want a report immediately. This has had an effect on my weekly deliverables. I don’t want to continue in this manner. I need to discuss and sort it out. How do I approach my manager?

Is this happening only to you or have the other team members (if any) brought up the same issue? There are two things that come to mind. First, I get the feeling that your manager is much disorganized and needs help with time management and prioritizing his work. Also likely that he isn’t able to manage clients well enough and he’s getting pressurized to deliver things quickly. Second, maybe his trust and confidence in your work is high and hence he is relying heavily on getting the work done only by you. Either way he shouldn’t be having too many last minute requests, at the cost of already-scheduled work.

Whatever be the reason, it’s time for you to set up a discussion. Now. His management style is hurting your deliverables and that will come up for scrutiny sooner than later. If it comes to that, you’ll not be able to justify by saying you were catering to last minute/unscheduled requests. There’s a high chance he’ll ask why you hadn’t brought up the issue earlier. You get my point? It’s better to sort these things out before it reaches a point of no return.

Timing is crucial when you set up a discussion. Don’t do it when he comes up with his next last-minute request. That will backfire. Instead choose a time when you’ve completed work on his latest request. That’ll give you some data points to talk about. You need to find out if he is comfortable with a formal discussion or an informal one? If it’s a formal discussion that he prefers, then set up a meeting on his calendar at his convenient time. Tell him you want to discuss a concern that’s affecting your work and deliverables. Next, when you meet him, go prepared with points that you want to discuss about. Don’t try and get defensive, rather have an open and candid conversation. Get to know his side of thinking and address them accordingly. If he’s a good manager, there’s a high possibility that he will see that his actions are indeed hurting your work and change them to work better. On the other hand, if he turns out to be a jerk, he’ll agree to change and yet continue with his previous style. Hope it’s the former and not the latter that you encounter, since you mention that he’s very supportive at work.

If he turns out to be a jerk and doesn’t change his style. You have a few choices. While scheduling your work the next time around, allow for some buffer. If a project requires 10 days, you ask for 14 days, you then have a 4 day buffer, should he come up with last minute requests. Make sure you document very request that comes your way. That will be helpful for later discussions and will also act as a cover. If that’s not the way you work, you decide if you want to work for this manager.

My experience says that nine of ten times, having discussions early into an issue helps clear the air. Good luck!

Post that might interest you: Yes, it's ok to disagree with your manager.

Awards aren't retention tools? Or are they?

Here’s the situation:

A manager has got to choose a top performer for giving the quarterly/annual performance based award. Should be a cakewalk, no?

Since he must have mentored, trained, tracked, monitored and given feedback for each team member’s performance over the last one year. Each one of them must have contributed their bit and in cases even gone beyond their scope of work. The review exercise isn’t done just for the purpose of the awards. It’s a critical part of the annual review process. Every thing gets captured. These stats help a manager identify the top performer. Well, that’s the ideal situation.

Apparently, that’s not what happens in most cases. I’m a big fan of performance based awards. As the name itself indicates, it purely based on performance. Yet, I’ve often come across managers who want to give out performance based awards to employees who show signs that they would quit soon (offer in hand!) or have started looking for better job opportunities with a competitor. That’s something that I strongly disagree with. Awards then serve as just another retention tool. I’m averse towards managers who use it for that purpose alone.

Yes, there are folks who do suggest that awards are part of retention strategies. That’s valid if you do have well defined criteria/parameters to judge performance and reward accordingly. Everyone on the team then is aware of their standing and hence decision making is a lot more transparent.

Here’s what an award really shouldn’t be:

• Lucky draw. You have one award to give; put names in a hat and pull out a lucky one! It’s just plain ridiculous. No. I’m not kidding. It’s happened.


• Make the award a cyclic trophy. This year Employee A gets the award, next year it’s Employee B’s turn!


• Popularity contest. Truly, this one takes the cake. I’ve been part of discussions where manager’s wanted to give performance based awards to their fave team member, who also happened to be popular among other team members. Again. It’s plain ridiculous.


• Have as many award categories as possible. It makes a manager’s job easy when he can choose multiple people from the same team for different awards! Sounds crazy?

All of the situations mentioned above do exist.

Employee recognition makes a huge difference and it is a big deal. Period. However, employees will take it seriously if it’s done in a transparent manner and managers play a vital role in deciding a recipient of the award. It’s obvious that the repercussions of an incorrect choice could be drastic. It’ll end up hurting team morale, causing rifts between team members, brings down productivity and not to mention the obvious, lot of exits.

The role of HR in this process is to ensure that key parameters for awards revolve around being fair, transparent and consistent. Get managers to stick to these parameters. If not, get rid of the awards. It's better to not have them, when it causes more issues.

• Have you received an award recently? Or anytime in your career?


• You felt you deserved to win that award that your colleague won?


• What has your experience been with performance (or anything similar) awards?

Would love to hear your thoughts. It will help other folks to deal with situations better. It will also help me to share your thoughts with people who frame criteria for identifying performance awardees.

That would make life at work a whole lot better.

Do we need a policy for this? Really!

Got an interesting question from a reader:

I’ve noticed on a number of occasions that people stand in office corridors for long periods of time to discuss things. Quite often these corridor-talks are a spill over from a meeting/conference that they would have concluded a few minutes back. At times these discussions turn out to be loud enough to disturb other employees in that work area. There are enough conference rooms at the workplace that people could use for their discussions. I was wondering if I should write to the HR asking them to come up with a policy that prohibits people from standing in the corridor and having discussions. Employees sitting around these areas are put through a lot of discomfort. I’m one of them. Would it be possible to have such a policy? What are your thoughts?

First, I haven’t come across such a policy in my career. At least not yet. Maybe in kindergarten. Really. When we were told: Don’t sit here. Don’t stand there. Don’t talk here. Don’t walk there. You get my point?

So my answer to your question is – No. It doesn’t make sense to have a policy that states that no one can talk in office corridors. Sounds ridiculous. No? It will trigger an unnecessary debate. One that will question the very fact that everyone working there are adults and so this can be dealt with better than having a policy. All that’s required to resolve this situation is some tips on social etiquette. An email from HR should suffice to resolve this issue.

Meanwhile, here’s something you can try. Next time if you notice someone talking in the corridor close to your work area, go and request them to continue their discussion in a conference room. Tell them that their chat in the corridor is disturbing your work. The reason I ask you mention that ‘you’ are affected is because I’m not sure if others feel the same way. If they have brought up a similar issue and expressed their displeasure, only then mention that people working in that area are affected. You really don’t want to make decisions for them, without their consent. With regard to asking people to stop chatting in the corridor, you might have to do this as many times as possible. It’s not a one time fix. But at least you’ll know when the discussion is loud enough to distract you from your work.

Most often people get so absorbed in their discussions, that they might not be aware of their voice decibel levels. Your request could solve this issue in a jiffy! Really. The best case scenario is that people will apologize and get into a conference room / take their discussion elsewhere. I’m not sure of the worst case scenario. Do you think you work with people who would just ignore your request and keep talking? I really doubt that.

Another point to consider is whether this is affecting just you or have the other employees expressed similar concern. If it’s just you, then maybe, you are unable to tune out minor distractions. That’s something you can work on that too. There are enough solutions to this, starting with an old fashioned ear plug. No. It doesn’t sound / look crazy. If you are the kind of person that requires a silent environment at work, then the first step would be to help yourself achieve that environment. It’s a lot easier than controlling other people’s actions.

Hope that helps.

HR asked to snoop around!

Got a question from a reader. It’s a lengthy one and so I’m posting a gist of it here.

Manager at a midsized Company is worried that he might lose talented team members to competitors, citing various reasons including better opportunities, performance reviews, higher salary, promotions, etc., He approaches the HR rep and asks her to snoop around and give him some information on who is going to/is contemplating whether to quit and by when. He claims this will help him plan his projects better and start looking for potential replacements.

The HR rep hasn’t been asked to do such a thing before in her role (or career) and is wondering what should be her approach to this request?

First, the manager’s just being a jerk. If your role has enough authority to take decisions, then its time to have a candid discussion with this manager regarding his future in a managerial role. Or maybe even in the Company. Harsh? Absolutely. Such a request is a red flag for his managerial abilities. That’s off course if you have the authority. Understandably it’s not going to be easy. But having the discussion isn’t just an option, its mandatory.

On the other hand, if you don’t have the authority, you must still go ahead have a candid discussion with the manager. Assuming your role may require you to interact with this manager on a daily/weekly basis, saying ‘NO’ now will set expectations for the future too. Here’s something that you could tell him, “I would not be able to do that. It’s against the ethics & integrity of my role.” No, you don’t need to be apologetic. That’s generally the thing that people say when they are asked such requests. When you start by saying, “I’m sorry…”, it gets understood as, “I may help you, but I don’t know what to do. Give me sometime.” So don’t give room for assumptions. Be assertive.

Next, it’s time you set things straight with this manager. His fear of losing talented folks from his team may stem from many facts, including bad managing skills, not being proactive, having issues with feedback (taking & giving), not in sync with business decisions, or plain fear to communicate any type of news that might impact the team, among so many other things. For one, he should be taking control of things that can be controlled from his end. Exploring opportunities within the team/Company, honest performance reviews, transparency in dealing with issues, etc., Instead of trying to control factors that are not within his reach. Get this manager to attend a training program to help him manage better, if you have the budget. Else, it’s time you nominate someone internally within the Company to train him, like Karen Wise suggests in this guest post.

You cannot control /avoid external recruiters from reaching your employees. Period. Trying to do that will result in you wasting your time & efforts. Asking the HR to snoop around isn’t going to resolve an issue that has deeper roots in his managerial traits.

Team member skips meetings regularly

Dear HR Store,

I’ve been recently promoted to lead an eight member team. As part of the team’s weekly activities we have a team meeting scheduled every Wednesday. It’s critical for all team members to attend the meeting. It helps us stay updated on the team’s goals/objectives. It’s also an interactive session where team members discuss a lot of things related to work. Stuff like challenges they faced during that week and their solutions are discussed. It’s a ground for learning too. My issue is with a particular team member who has been skipping these meetings regularly giving far too many excuses. At times it’s ok, since he is held up with other activities that are critical and needed immediate attention. But the occurrences are far too many to ignore. The other team members have begun to notice the pattern.

The team member doing this excels at his work. So I’m worried any hasty reactions from me could end up creating more problems. How do I go about resolving this issue?

Thanks,
Manager

Well, looks like this team member has been given too much leeway. Your case is a classic example for setting a ‘precedent’. It not only poses an immediate danger but also has long term repercussions.

Agreed that the team member excels at his work, but that’s no grounds for not complying with the rest of the team. Are you telling the others that they are good enough to be excused from the meeting? See. Setting precedents are bad. Period. You’ve just experienced the tough part of being a manager. Your ‘No’ should have enough logic and ‘Yes’ should make enough sense.

How do you go about dealing with this? First step would be to have a candid talk with him during your one—to—one meeting. Before you start with telling, “You should attend all team meetings starting this week”, give him a chance to explain his prior absence. There could a reason for missing them than just giving an excuse for attending to another activity during the same time. To start with, give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he is really overloaded with work. Maybe he doesn’t see enough value in attending the meeting. Or worse, he just feels he’s the best in the team and doesn’t need to attend meetings when he knows it all! If that’s the reason, you have more trouble than you think. Your response will depend on his reasons for not attending. Being supportive is fine, as long as it’s for the right reasons. If you’ve set up the meeting as a weekly recurrence, the team has been given enough notice. So getting caught up with other work at that time is a sign of bad time management. More than twice is never a coincidence. Set it right.

On the contrary, trying to enforce a rule like, “Everyone must participate in team meetings”, will backfire for sure. Team members will be present but they’ll never participate. So try and avoid taking that approach. If the agenda of the meeting is to figure out if the team is aligned to business goals/objectives and for sharing their challenges of the week, then your one-to-one meeting and email should suffice. Meeting every week to discuss the same things takes away the importance of the discussion. Sorry, I digress.

Back to your question. As a manager, you’ll have to play a dual-role in getting team members to adhere to team activities. One part of the role (the good part) is when you encourage team members to attend these meetings citing a chance to learn from others. The second part (the bad part) of the role is when you make it clear that all team members will be treated equally and any violations will have the same consequences. Being a manager is a lot tougher than you thought!

So first have a discussion with the team member. If it continues, write him a mail. I really doubt if it should get beyond this! If it does, you have to take a tough call. You don’t need a star performer with the wrong attitude who could end up hurting a well balanced team. That’s something you don’t want to deal with. Act fast. And have that discussion. It should sort things out. Make it clear that you are the authority on this issue and that shouldn't be taken for granted.

Next time. Be wary of setting precedents. You are the manager. And you should decide what works best for the team. Don’t let the entire team manage you! If it happens, there’s only one way it will go. Downhill.

Good luck!

Is this a bold move?

You decide that after reading this post.

There’s enough written about managers. I’ve written about it myself here, here & here. But this post is completely devoted to a much avoided/evaded part of a manager’s role: Giving Feedback

So here’s a suggestion I have: Why don’t we make giving feedback a part of a manager’s performance review? Make it objective and quantifiable.

Why should we go with this approach to management? Here’s why:

- It will make managers give feedback. Simple. Right? Yes, sometimes a basic request for feedback isn’t met. At times it’s completely avoided too.

- Feedback can be tracked and reviewed along with other parameters as part of the manager’s performance review. It would help identify areas in which the manager might need help, when it comes to giving feedback.

- Takes away the opportunity to just give hints and get away with it. The recipient knows exactly what’s been said.

- Avoids arguments. When the feedback is clear and precise it doesn’t give room for arguments, debates or worse, assumptions!

- When you make it quantifiable, the manager’s focus will be on giving feedback with enough data.

- Makes it a direct interaction between the manager and his direct report. Often, feedback is passed through other leads/employees. An approach that always backfires.

- It helps set-up a clear communication channel between managers and direct reports. Performance parameters can be set openly and discussed without any discomfort.

- Expectations can be set, managed and communicated effectively.

- It takes away the assumption that giving feedback is a one-time effort.

- Once the feedback is in place, it would help with formulating measures for improving the direct report’s performance. Follow-up can be well planned, tracked and executed easily.

- PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) will make more sense than before. Since feedback is captured on a regular basis and hence helps avoid surprising the recipient.

Thinks to watch out for:

- Managers need to be trained before implementing this move.

- Feedback is to be given only about work. Shouldn’t be a personal judgment of the manager.

There could be many more instances to look out for. That’s exactly why a training session would be helpful. Is this a bold move? Maybe not. It’s a matter of companies implementing and manager’s accepting it. Yes, Change is Strange!

Do you think your organization is ready for this? Are you ready for this? Do you manage people? Are you a leader? Do you report to a manager who gives feedback? Do you report to a manager who hates giving feedback? Would love to hear your thoughts. I’m open to receive feedback!

Learning on the job (flipside)

Scene from a recent shopping experience at a sports shop:

(Backdrop: There’s a sale at a particular sports shop. My wife went there in the morning and picked a t-shirt for me, which ended not being the right fit. During the purchase the sales guy at that time/shift had assured my wife that she could exchange it later if I didn’t like the fit/color. And off course only on terms that there was no damage caused to the goods purchased. Understandable. Later in the afternoon we tread our way back to the store to exchange the Tee and we end up meeting the sales guy from the next shift. Here’s what happens next…)

My wife: Hi Joe (sales rep), I picked this t-shirt this morning, for my husband. The fit isn’t right for him and so I would like to exchange it for another one.

Joe (thinks for a minute): Was this bought from the sale?

Wife: Off course, that’s what I told you. Here’s the bill for reference.

Joe: Ok, let me check.

(Runs to his pal in the store to check and then returns)

Joe: Sorry, that was the last one and we don’t have another one to exchange it against. You’ll have to keep it (offers no other solution, lost his chance to ‘WOW’).

Me: (!!!! Momentarily dumbfounded): Ok. Since it doesn’t fit me well, I cannot wear it. So could I buy another t-shirt not from the sale but at retail price and I’ll pay you the difference?

Joe (thinks again): Sorry. No. You can’t do that! Since your wife bought this at the sale, not from the retail section. You’ll have to keep it (Second chance, to give an alternate solution. Lost.)

Me (slightly agitated): Why can’t I exchange it for another one that costs more? You’ll stand to gain more money. (Makes sense, right?)

Joe: Sorry. I was informed (by his colleague) that the system doesn’t allow us to do that.

Me: So you telling me you can’t exchange it because a system that you are in control, doesn’t let you do it! Ridiculous. Can you please check with your manager?

Joe: (Again runs off to check with his manager & returns. Smiling.): Yes, he says you can exchange it. Sorry for the trouble, I’m new here and learning on the job.

Result: T-shirt exchanged for another one from a retail section and difference amount is paid. The store stood to make more money and we got a better Tee.

I’m a big fan of learning on the job. Don’t get me wrong when I tell you that learning on the job is dangerous. There’s a powerful downside to learning on-the-job.

- You really learn to approach things in a way your job-mentor would. No? That’s at least until you start thinking about the process or procedure to do certain things.
- Most often there’s no written document to refer too. So you are called upon to use your judgment/discretion in handling queries.
- There’s no budget allotted for employee training and development. So your sources of learning are colleagues, books (self-funded), networking sites or blogs. Sources that are FREE. The challenge is in identifying who is authentic and worth your time.

So if you are an employee asked to learn on the job: Here's a few things that you might want to watch out for:

- Ask questions. Listen. Ask questions. Listen…continue the learning process.

- Understand the escalation hierarchy. If your colleague (peer) is your max ceiling. It’s trouble. Get access to leads/managers.

- USE your discretion. The Company either tested you for it or knows you are good with using discretion. Don’t stop that.

- Are you allowed to make mistakes? Or do you get pulled up for each one you make? Helps you understand the Company’s stand.

- Go ahead and network furiously. It's the best way to help you learn on the job. Are you on FaceBook, Orkut, Twitter, LinkedIn? No? Start now.

- If you are uncomfortable/don’t like roles that require you to learn on the job. DO NOT accept the job offer. You'll end up doing a big disservice to yourself.

- Last, don’t forget to use Common Sense. It’s a powerful tool. (Sorry, that was sarcastic) But far too many of us tend to ignore it.

If you are an Employer promoting learning on the job: A few pointers that you could take into consideration.

- First, hire right. Many people like documentation at work that they could follow during their initial days. And if you don't have any, then maybe such people will have difficulty with the learn-on-the-job working style. You are better off hiring people who have had prior learning-on-the-job experience.

- There will be mistakes. Don’t get too critical. Better off giving constructive feedback. It’s part of an employee’s learning curve.

- Allow them to question. It will help tweak/build your processes and also understand their thinking methodology.

- While hiring, tell candidates that the role requires them to learn on the job. And dig deep during interviews to know their comfort with such an approach at work. Interviews that are situation-based would help immensely.

- If you have hired right, you’ll have employees who know to use discretion. A powerful skill-set. Especially when it’s learning on the job. Allow them to use it.

I’ve been a one-man HR team for long enough and have mostly learnt on the job. I’ve noticed that people are either comfortable or they are not, when it comes to learning on the job. It’s best to decide whether you want to take up a role that requires it.

I would love to hear thoughts from readers who have built their careers in similar fashion. Do share them.

Allow yourself to learn...

….and the ‘Learning Curve’ will end up along the right path! That’s a piece of advice I got from my mentor when I started my career. And I’ve given it so much importance, that it has kept me in real good shape.

The reason I bring up this subject is because I’ve often heard candidates ask, "What will be my learning curve?” I find that odd. Really. Were they waiting for their learning curve to take-off? Or are they asking what they’ll learn from this Company that would help them get ahead of the curve? Maybe, I’ve read the question wrong. Maybe, I haven’t got it wrong. Since improving one's learning curve isn't going to happen overnight or for working at a Company. The Company will only act as a medium to help you get to your goals. The learning curve is driven by the person than by any external factor.

You may argue, the market conditions are bad, companies aren’t willing to experiment; my manager doesn’t allow freedom at work and many more reasons. But doesn't that form part of your learning curve? I think it does. You learn to cope with it differently, think differently to get a work around, make a well thought out case study for your ideas that your manager will buy into, come up with a practical business model that the Company doesn’t see as an experiment. Yes. I’ll say all of the above are possible. I‘ve tried them and hence won’t agree otherwise. So if one isn't thinking along those lines, then maybe you have resigned yourself to accept whatever comes your way.

More often than not, when you allow yourself to learn you are in control of the situation than vice-versa. So that brings me to the question. What have I done with the advice I got a long time back?

Be ready to unlearn!
It really is the start point. Yes, your direct report may have a better solution. But your gut feel/instinct is to go with your solution. That’s the start to unlearning. When you begin to see reason in other’s approach at work, you learn to think and reason in new ways. Be ready to explore.

Get yourself a good mentor
Yes, I got one from a completely different area of work. I like it that way. Since this person knows my strengths and is also able to see my objectives from a third person’s point of view. That gives me an unbiased opinion. Ok, some may not agree here. But that’s why I also follow experts in my field of work

Reach out to experts
You are one too. But then you have so much more to learn. Take on the ‘Learn & Share’ attitude. You’ll be amazed.

Accept feedback
But that doesn’t mean you get steamrolled with criticism. Over time you’ll learn to put active filters on feedback and take the positives. Not every opinion counts, but the ones that really count will leave you a better person. The trick is I identifying that particular feedback.

Ask questions
I’ve seen it happen in meetings. When the organizer asks, “Are there any questions?” the room suddenly goes quiet. Each person waiting for the other to start asking questions. That’s bad. Yes, it’s obvious. You have a question. Go ahead and ask. You don’t need to wait. It’s ok to look stupid now than when you get done with a project/ mess-up half way through, only to realize you got all wrong. Ask early. Get answers early.

Embrace Change
Doesn’t mean you go about changing everything you ever believed it. But an open mind will help you understand the necessity to change. For the better.

Now, get to work on it. And let me know if there are more ways that have helped you get ahead of the learning curve.

Guest Post: "Gee! I'm the boss now!"

Author: Vidooshak

Talking to some younger cousins the other day, I was impressed by their desire to become a ‘team lead’ before the age of 25. Another spoke of how she wanted to quit because of office-politics and harassment at work. On further probing, the said harassment was described as being overlooked for promotion despite a lofty work experience spanning 9 months, and a manager expecting her to resolve customer issues even if it meant staying late at work.

For some reason, the definition of having ‘arrived’ includes becoming a manager—the earlier the better. Unless you have a whole bunch of people reporting to you, unless you can just pick up the phone and delegate, unless you can spend the day “in meetings” or on the BlackBerry there is just no satisfaction to all that hard-work. Whether in a call-center or technical field support, a software development firm or a sales organization, moving up (or away?) from being the first in the line of fire to a more responsible (a.k.a people-management) role seems to be an over-riding goal. In many cases, 5 years seem to be the maximum a person is willing to sacrifice doing the so-called grunt work.

While attending customer calls as a network engineer in other countries, I would often need to collaborate with much older people-- also there as network engineers. These were people getting their hands dirty unclogging the Internet drains, even through late 30’s or early 40’s, while here I am barely out of college, wondering what I did wrong to be stuck with a field job. They were not only happy to roll up their sleeves and get cracking; some of them consciously ‘avoided’ a managerial role. That got me thinking about our obsession with becoming a manager, especially in the Indian context.

I often hear about the frustrating ‘culture’ at top Indian service companies. Despite making billion dollar revenues, people complain about the bureaucracy at these companies and how stepping-up to a task can be suicidal. Everyone has many managers and everyone is probably managing many. The focus is on following process and looking over your back, rather than looking forward to a personal achievement.

A system with good managers that know how to get things done is an obvious asset. You will see excellent compliance but rare (if any) new ideas and better ways to do the same thing. When more of the ones that can think, imagine and innovate decide instead to delegate, it leads to process stagnation. That could be one reason why despite our IT success, we are still waiting to see a successful software product or true MNC born out of India, 20 years after the technology boom started.

Global MNC’s often expect us to design or service for a competitive market. Ironically, this privilege comes when you are in a managerial role, without the luxury of interfacing closely with that market as in the field-engineer days. Being isolated by layers of staff, one relies upon the experiences of a past life to spend fruitful time in this ‘ivory tower’. This can get difficult unless you’ve spent a substantial number of years in the trenches, facing enemy fire and honing survival instincts for just such a day.

In the old days, public sector units had a long and structured path to middle-management. In a career spanning 40 years, it could take 15 to 20 years before you got your first charge. Such organizations had their own flaws but the subject-matter expertise and depth of these individuals had few peers. A testimony to this is the plethora of retired oil and telecom PSU executives that have led India’s largest private oil and telecom firms to worldwide glory. Their mettle was forged in the slow fire of uncertainty, lack of resources and a life of research before Google. Today’s ‘flat organizations’ and smaller headcounts tend to reward you with this responsibility before you know it.

The more varied, wicked and vicious the early years, the better prepared one gets for handling monsters creeping at us when we occupy the hot seat. Until then, any ‘office politics’ is all in the mind; the so-called harassment is nothing more than rich experience. As for the manager ‘status symbol’, that obsession won’t die easy. India does not yet have a culture where patents and published research fetch you respect. So, college kids will continue to book their Honda Civic using the first paycheck. And hope they can delegate the driving to a junior, in a few years time.

About the Author:
Vidooshak (blog name) writes his blog over at Baingan-lores. According to his blog, he's a fond Papa who vents politically incorrect awe at India Shining inspite of Bangalore Whining.

Employees will not particpate in surveys...

… when it’s NOT anonymous.

… has far too many redundant questions.

… takes more than 10 minutes of their time.

…when they don’t know why it’s being done in the first place. Really.

… when they don’t get to know the results. The cynics will just say, “I told you so”.

... when they don’t know the outcome of their feedback. They’ll assume its either dumped/deleted/overlooked/read by both their HR & Manager who didn’t like it (no more feedback!). That’s bad.

… when the survey does nothing to improve their working environment.

… when there’s one that they need to fill every month! It happens. True.

… when it has to be done on paper, with someone looking over the shoulder! Again. It does happen. True.

… when their manager(s)/senior management don’t show the same levels of interest.

… when the survey is seen as a HR thing-to-do. It’s more than that. Right?

… when the timing of the survey is all wrong; closer to performance review/product deadlines/downsizing/management restructuring/vacation.

And then you thought surveys were so easy to administer!

Guest post: Frisk Free!

Author: Narayanan Viswanathan

Narayanan's back to write another excellent article. You can read his earlier post here. This time around his focus is on..well, read to find out more...

The serious indictment for organizations across the globe is now on providing safer work environments, by insulating the associates from external threats, besides having internal security mechanisms that would help alleviate potential threats to business continuity due to external malicious acts. All leading multi-national companies are implementing critical and important ‘first-in-line’ policies towards internal security, to ensure safety of their data, business processes, fixed assets and employees.

The information security as a process has been constantly evolving ever since the advent of the IT industry. However, we are not only talking about information security here. In recent times, the importance of physical security to be airtight has assumed equal importance if not greater, in the wake of the threat posed by global terrorism – from Manchester to Mumbai. Today’s professionals are exposed to potentially perilous situations and the term Job Security, will now have a new meaning. The term Workplace Hazard normally associated only with blue collared workers will henceforth be applicable to white collared professionals too – only that the context in which they are placed into perspective would vary. The serious indictment for organizations is now on providing safer work environments, by insulating the associates from such external threats and also in having internal security mechanisms that would help alleviate potential threats to business continuity due to external malicious acts. The business entities therefore, are focusing their attention on information and physical security policies as much as strategic business plans, financial management, or human capital management.

Most companies seem to have a formal security policy in place; but very few enforce them in entirety. However, a generic analysis of some of the initiatives taken by the business entities off late, in ensuring internal security, goes to prove that they want to leave no stones unturned. This will potentially transform the way businesses would operate – in effect, necessitating a full-fledged change management to enable this transition at the grass-root level. In these circumstances, as an individual, I ask myself;

· Who will be responsible for internal security? Let’s look at the answer options – Management, GIS Team, Security Personnel, Every associate in the organization…
· What are the implications of implementing vs. not implementing a stringent security system? Here, as I think through, the answer options can be as humongous as grains of sand on the beach or as small as I would like it to be…
· How much of my personal space am I willing to give up, in order to feel more secure? The options here seem to be dichotomous, Am I convenient or Am I secure…

I will try to zero-in on the final answers based on analogies. Let’s say I walk into the office tomorrow, and I have a security personnel, whom I would rudely pass-off every day as someone who didn’t do well in his school days and is therefore on the other side of the table, frisking me or peering into ‘my’ belongings; and also commanding me to show my ID Card, as proof of my association with the organization. Well, I might give him a look of displeasure and repugnance. I might even consider telling him, “Do you know who I am?” I might deem the whole process as irrelevant, as a nuisance and a potential waste of my executive time. I might feel livid that I am made to wait longer than I would ideally like to, at the entrance; as unwarranted barricade before I can move into my coveted workstation, to dole out all the game changing solutions that will benefit my organization.

However, isn’t it only fair that I give myself a chance to think, that the robustness of the security process will potentially provide me a good sense of safety, and in effect enable me to concentrate on what I need to do, than what will happen to me while I am on it? Come to think of it, as is the case with life itself, everything is a trade-off, but here, it is a good trade-off to make. The question that I will need to answer may be, am I convenient or am I secure… it is less likely that it can be both – but we can strike a balance.

It might be expensive and inconvenient to implement a security policy but it would be costlier, if it isn't implemented. A comparable metaphor could be that of a 9-10-Jack in the cricket team, the wallies of the willow, going out to bat in the middle, wearing every possible protective gear available. Of all you know, Jack might get a perfect Yorker in the very first-ball, uprooting all three stumps. Now, that would make one question whether it was worth the while, for him to wear all the protective gear. Let’s say Jack was disinclined to wear a helmet, and the first ball was a bouncer – won’t we have a situation here? In effect, it’s more like “trust in god, but lock your car”.

The moral of the story, is that internal security is everybody’s responsibility. It starts from the proclivity of the top-management in emphasizing on the need for implementing information and physical security, by defining key policies and processes. It ends with the concerned individuals vested with the responsibility of enforcing these policies and processes. The vital missing-link here will be ‘you and I’ – we need to be able adjust to the renewed need of the hour and cooperate whole-heartedly in the implementation of the internal security policies.

The next time I come across a nonchalant security personnel, unequivocally examining the rear of my Car or peering into my lunch bag, at the end of the search I would probably tell him… “Thanks mate. Since you are here, I shall now go to my workstation worry-free”

About the Author:
Narayanan Viswanathan, is a certified Global Professional in Human Resource Management (GPHR) with over 10 years of progressively responsible hands-on experience in the entire gamut of HR functions; with functional specialization in Talent Management & Talent Engagement. Currently, he is part of a 6-member HR Centre of Excellence (COE) team, at Cognizant, which is the strategic wing of corporate human resources, that manages the cross-geographical implementation of Balance Score Card, Performance Management, Career Development and Career Progression initiatives. He is also a Six Sigma Green Belt certified professional.

What would you do?

………when someone asks you a query?

This post is an after-effect of my interactions with my current cellular network provider. All I wanted to do was get a cell number transferred from my previous employer to my name. The only problem in this case, is that the previous Company I worked for, no longer exists (they got acquired sometime back). And somehow forgot to transfer the cell-number back to my name. So I either transfer it to my name or stand to lose a number I’ve been using for the last eight years! I would rather choose the former option, given that far too many people need to be informed if I change the number. This option saves a lot of inconvenience too. Ok, that’s the context.

Now, the reps at the counter were clueless on the process to transfer the number to my name, under the given situation. They seemed lost. So, they just told me: “We wouldn’t be able to transfer the number to your name.” What?!? They said that because they did not know what to do!!! However, my perseverance eventually paid off! After interactions with over fifteen different people, one manager knew about the process to get the job done!! Apparently a company wide email was circulated and no one but this manager had paid attention to it. So the others ended up clueless…and they continued to work that way.

Yes, there’s a possibility that it could have been a case of bad/non-existing organizational training on processes. But could the reps have done a better job? Off course they could have. Here’s how & I did explain it to a senior manager who strongly agreed:

Scenario #1: Someone asks you a query. You know the answer to that. You tell them what is to be done. Case closed. Customer’s happy with the resolution. You get a good service rating.

Scenario #2: You have no clue on what is to be done? What next? Simple. You either tell the customer you’ll check and get back with a resolution within a certain timeframe (and you should get back). Or pick the phone and call your lead or manager and get to know the process. If they don’t know, call another manager. Or raise an internal helpdesk ticket. Or send a mail to your resolutions department. Sounds simple right? But somehow none of these options got executed. You have an angry customer at the counter. And your service rating plummeted.

This is a classic situation that happens so very frequently in HR. There are far too many processes and policies to remember right away. Or there’s no process in place at all. But what are we doing about those requests? Many would ignore it, thinking it will get routed to another HR rep. The chain continues, until one of them takes the effort to find out and reply to the query. The rep that gave the reply definitely deserves a pat on the back, for going beyond his scope of work to get the job done. The others have fallen way behind on the learning curve.

You agree?

Guest Post: From my wife!

Finally…

A non-hr person blogging about HR practices! The human resource professional who runs this blog thinks it would be a great idea to see HR from a different angle, an angle that would be more cynical, ready to find fault & more commonly called, The HR Store's wife!

Well, get ready for a whirlwind cynical side. I’ve worked in 3 companies – 1 Start-up, 1 mid-scale company and 1 big conglomerate. I will try to talk about my experiences in each of these companies and more importantly, my interaction with HR there.

I work for a humongous corporation now with over 75000 employees all over the world. Nothing works beyond process & policies and off course your HR rep. I always thought I would be the one to rebel against this kind of a company, but I find a weird sort of security where I know I cannot be screwed over by a mean boss or the blue-eyed boy of the boss or the curvaceous colleague (all have happened, I swear!) Everything at work is documented and no matter how many bosses change or how many projects you have been moved into, your past is always taken into accord, good or bad and that to me is very comforting. The HR rep here is very accommodating and she is even expected to respond to our emails in 24 hours (its a rule!!) Though they don’t really give us an answer that we want, it helps that we have an answer in a day's time. A lot of approvals are done by the HR and this helps that we don't have to get our silly transport, cafeteria, HR system issues, compensation clarity, across to our bosses who are really not interested. My only crib about the HR here is that they lack personality; they are cold, unemotional, efficient machines who eventually get the work done! Touch-time with employees is purely based on necessity.

Prior to this I worked for a start-up. This has to be the most horrible company ever in the history of mankind!! Really. It was run and worked on the whims and fancy of one man; the CTO cum IT Director cum Marketing Director cum Sales Director cum every other senior management role. The HR in this company was absolutely non-existent. This was because of the said manager, like I mentioned above. The HR director was above everyone and did not think he could stoop down to our level (employee level). The thing that most bugged me was, when I had to discuss salary issues, leave issues, medclaim issues; issues that should rightly have been handled by the HR or Finance personnel in the company, it was addressed by the above manager. It was hell and I was so grateful to have got out with my temper intact!!

Finally, the mid-scale company I worked for was comfortable. The projects that I was involved in were pretty ordinary, but my working relationship with my bosses and HR was fantastic! The gripe here is, the HR were constantly involved in extra-curricular activities, team building activities and everything else associated with ‘fun @ work’ theme. I am all for some fun @ work activities but when it happens about 4 times a month, it gets a little annoying and downright irritable when you have deadlines and releases to meet. And they expect you to participate (mandate) without any exceptions. And God forbid, had you ever participated in one of these events once, the HR personnel organizing the event would be all over you like an ant at a picnic. It would probably have helped if they had spent their time drafting some policies for leave, travel, re-location, regular FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) etc., because every time we approached them for issues relating to the above, they were all set to play Dumb Charades!!

Based on my experience, I felt that the management got it all wrong when hiring HR folks. There was always a feeling that the HR rep didn’t fit in with the business needs. Maybe that’s something companies can look deep into. After all, if HR reps are representing the business internally to employees, then wouldn’t it make sense to spend more time in getting the right candidate?

Thanks for reading the post and let me know what you think of it!

Co-worker takes credit for team's ideas!

“Recently at work, the team had discussions on topics related to a current project. As part of the discussions, each team member was supposed to present their ideas on ways to resolve certain project related issues. Since it wasn’t a formal meeting, the manager wasn’t involved. Neither was the meeting documented. One of the team member’s however had written down notes and then put together a presentation. The team didn’t know of the presentation and she didn’t share with us either. However, she went on to share it with both our manager and senior manager, claiming that the ideas presented were her own!! She had blatantly plagiarized/stolen ideas from us. So you can imagine how shocked we must have been when the manager sent the presentation to the entire team praising the team member. My question is: How do we go about telling the manager that the team member has taken credit for our ideas? Or should we stay off it and guard our discussions in future”

I agree it’s a terrible situation to be in. At the face of it, your team member’s acted like a jerk. Taking credit for someone else’s work is a strict workplace no-no. But there’s too much involved in this situation to give you a quick reply. So let me try to answer it in parts.

First, you say it was an informal meeting and hence the manager wasn’t there. So I presume it was a general discussion within the team and more of a collaborative discussion. One where ideas flow freely and people end up forgetting who gave which idea! Really. Unless the idea had an earth shattering impact and one that could change the course of our planet, stick to it, otherwise it’s ok to let go. It shouldn’t look like you are obstructing free flow of ideas/thoughts towards improving business or work. Next time you may want to show some restraint while talking about your ideas and yes, please document it in a formal meeting. If it has to stay an informal one, watch what you have to say. You could talk to your team member directly and resolve it without the manager’s involvement. Tell her that you found her tactic to be grossly wrong and the team’s not taken it well. Hopefully she’ll realize her mistake and apologize. Else, read on.

Second, your team member pulled a fast one and thinks she can get away with it. She thinks that way because she knows that most of the team will stay quiet and not blow the whistle. Remember there’s no documentation to prove that the idea originated from you. Right? The moment to blow the whistle has passed and anything you say now will look like doing damage control. She’s fully aware of that. Now you have to decide if you want to stand up or back-off. If you choose to stand up for your ideas, then your manager’s involvement looks imminent.

So how to get your message across to the manager? Since the manager wasn’t involved in your team discussion, she could be totally unaware of the origins of the ideas. She’s seen it for the first time and naturally she is thrilled with the effort of her team member. So you’ll need to build your discussion carefully. You don’t want to make it sound like a complaining session. Set-up a discussion with the manager and outline the details of the team’s informal discussion. Give some context to the origin of the ideas. Don’t make it a meeting to accuse the team member. But you would do well to speak of the impact this negative approach has had on yourself and the team too. Trust is a vital part of teamwork and quite sure that’s taken the maximum impact. You may want to highlight that. Also such negative tactics will build mistrust between team members and eventually will discourage them from talking more freely about their ideas. The manager needs to know that too. Hopefully your manager is a fair person and will see clearly through this issue.

Direct confrontation is uncomfortable for a lot of people. It requires courage to stand up and talk. But I urge you have that discussion with the manager, because if it goes unreported then the team member could repeat it again and again. That will only increase the team’s frustration, leading to low team morale and productivity too. Also, a lot of companies have innovation as a key trait in performance reviews and if it’s the same with your review, then you don’t want your efforts to go wasted. Would you? Or even get it stolen by another team member.

This is not a unique situation, it’s happens quite frequently. You can’t rule out chances of it not happening again. Maybe someone should just put their hand up and speak.

Any thoughts from the reader’s?

When a team member dislikes process!

Got this query from a manager.

“I work at a large multinational where process plays a vital role in getting things done on a daily basis. I manage a team of over 20 people and so process becomes even more critical for the team to perform as a cohesive unit. We recently hired a candidate from a start-up and are finding it difficult to get him to follow process. I understand that a start-up does give a lot of freedom at work, but our current set up does not allow for that kind of culture. I have tried to understand his need for freedom to a large extent and indeed have given him enough time to settle down. But now I’m finding it difficult to manage him. How do I get him to follow process?”

Well, it’s a typical case of a person who has moved from a start-up to a large organization. While your need for process is to ensure things are done in timely manner, that every process could be seen as a roadblock to creativity by the new hire! You mention that he is a new hire. So here’s a question that I have for you: Did you set the right expectations during the hiring process? The reason I ask is that most often managers feel that they have found the right candidate and end up promising the world to them. Just to get them onboard! It’s also one of the primary reasons that managers find it tough to manage new hires or even existing employees. They find it hard to balance between future promises and current reality.

If you believe that you’ve set the right expectations and have not made promises which you can’t keep (you shouldn't be making one!), then it’s time to sit-down and have that discussion with the new hire (let’s call him Joe). Yes, it’s good that you have understood Joe’s need for freedom, but that need for freedom shouldn’t affect the remaining people on the team. It’s something that can be avoided. Joe could just be resisting process because he has never tried or followed one till date. He could have been the only one working on a certain project. More like a one-person team. So I wouldn’t dismiss it off saying its dislike for process. It could just be a basic lack of understanding for the need to have one. As a manager, that understanding should come from you. So how do you do that? You could get him to do an activity in a way which he feels works best. While you want to ensure that you don’t belittle his efforts to get the desired outcome, you could define that same activity in a process oriented way. An approach that helps him save a lot of time & effort! It’s a lot easier to explain process while on the job.

Another common trait I’ve observed is that start-up guys tend to be very action-oriented. For them, results matter most and not really how they achieve it? They don’t have the liberty of time & money to sit down and analyze their approach. So projecting the process as a tool that would help to get things done, is another way of get his attention. He just needs to see results that come out from following process. All this is possible to a certain extent, after which process isn’t an option. He needs to believe that you have process to make life at work a lot simpler and also to improve performances. That’s not going to happen overnight. Have patience.

While you do talk to Joe, just ensure that you don’t kill his urge to question processes. He’s the kind of guy who’ll help you tweak that process, optimize it or even introduce new ones! Really. I’ve seen it happen. After all, process is one way to ensure there is some order to chaos! Nothing like getting one from a person known to have worked in an adhoc/chaotic workplace. Right?

Now, if you have not made the right choice in your hiring process. You are then trying your very best to fit square pegs into round holes! Hope you are not in this category.

Team member who complains incessantly

A reader (manager to a group of 12 employees) sent a query asking: How to manage a team member who complains incessantly? Should he involve HR in resolving the issue?

So here’s my take on the subject. You don’t need to manage/tolerate his tantrums. Unless his complaints are for valid reasons and you are not seeing them as clearly as him. Really. Many of them may ask you to tolerate him and not respond/empathize with him and in due course he’ll leave you alone. Yes, he’ll leave you alone and will pick on someone else. He’ll not stop until he has griped about everything under the sun to everyone on the team. That’s something the team can live without. They have enough on their own plates to worry about. So avoiding the situation will only aggravate it to a large extent. Even to the point of your team lodging a formal complaint!

If you have reached a state where you are complaining about him, then I wonder how much the team has already gone through! Further, your team right now is not appreciative of the fact that you haven’t done anything as yet about the issue. You are their manager and they are expecting you to lead them out of this issue too.

First, set up a discussion with the employee, to sort things out. Yes, you are ready to listen, but only up to a point where his complaints make sense. No. You did not set up the discussion to hear him complain about the sun, stars, moon, pavements, bus, stairs or movies, among a thousand other things that might have no relation to your work activities. If it does (which I seriously doubt), you listen and act accordingly to resolve it. But I doubt if that would have been the case, else others would have had some opinions too. Right now, they are having an issue with him! It’s because they don’t think it’s worthy of spending their time. Your discussions as a manager should be towards identifying the factors that are causing the team member to act that way. Identify why is he complaining so often? Maybe he is just asking to be heard. It could either be that simple or complicated up to a point where he needs some professional help! You can decide further course of action based on your meeting. Why have you waited so long to talk to him? I wonder. Sorry, I digress.

But it’s hard to explain things without data points. Don’t make your discussions seem vague. Without factual data it will sound more like an accusation/allegation. It will backfire. On the other hand, don’t line up a hundred situations where he displayed such behavior and spend time investigating. It will seem like finger pointing. It might send him towards extreme behavior. He could end up a bigger jerk. Use the data points to tell him where you felt he could have done without complaining. Give him the confidence to come straight to you, if he does have genuine complain. But you need to tell him, that his current behavior/attitude is hurting the team and his standing among team members. It could end up hurting team morale, balance or even productivity. It’s like the case of the person who cried wolves too many times. No one will take him seriously even if he has a real reason to complain!

Should you involve HR? Maybe not until you’ve had your first discussion. If the problem persists, then rope in HR for future discussions. HR may not have a policy that tells you how to handle such team members. They will help you understand the situation from a third person’s perspective and take fair decisions. The end result, however, will be based on your call. You don’t want to sound like you went complaining to HR about him! You are the manager and you need to have that tough discussion with him. Yes, you need HR’s help when he doesn’t get the message.

In case you have tried your best to resolve the issue in a professional manner, but find that nothing much has changed. That’s when you ask, do you really want such a person on your team?