What to do when complaints are about a senior manager

Suppose your employees are grumbling about one of your senior managers, the director of a key department – he’s much too harsh and turnover is high.  What should you do? One option, the easy way out, is to ignore it.  This option may be especially appealing if productivity is decent, despite the grumbling.

To read the rest of this article from the Business First of Louisville, see: What to do when complaints are about a senior manager http://louisville.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2005/01/24/editorial2.html

But suppose you look deeper and the evidence is clear:  Your senior manager is a critical perfectionist.  He micro-manages with sarcastic criticism and put-downs, browbeats staff relentlessly, never gives compliments and hogs the credit and shovels the blame.  He harasses, bullies and abuses his staff.  Even long-term stars want out and productivity is merely OK.  Unhappiness has spread to other departments that have interacted with him.

You can still find easy explanations to avoid getting involved: You have other worries, there are no red flags on balance sheets, he treats you OK and he hasn’t thrown anything, hit anyone or blown up in public.  Employees always complain about hard-driving leaders and why open a can of worms?

Leaders who still gloss over these situations are merely conflict-avoidant.  They’ll ensure years of hard feelings, declining performance, scorn behind their backs and, eventually, increased costs to clean out a bigger cesspool.  Or maybe they think they’ll be long gone before it backs up to their door.

Another option is often chosen by leaders who think, “We’re all good people here. If we got together we’d agree on an effective compromise.”  They hope the politically correct approach of facilitated negotiation will manufacture a solution that works for everyone.

But in this situation that’s just a band-aid.  It won’t lead to long-term, productive change because the problem is a brutal manager, not a lack of understanding and acceptance of different styles within a reasonable range.

At this point, there’s little incentive for the senior manager to make consistent, lasting change.  During negotiations a lot of talk will happen, fingers will get pointed, people will get argumentative and defensive, hopes will get raised and dashed, and people will become even more polarized, antagonistic and litigious.  You’ve simply delayed a real solution and upped the pain and cost.

I recommend a third option: To give the problem manager a chance to turn things around and mend fences, give him an ultimatum - “change or else” - backed by short timelines, close monitoring, effective support for the changes you want him to make and repeated praise from you for any progress.

Get a coach-advisor the manager can respect, accept and trust.  He will need to learn a new managing style and new communication skills.  Expect stepwise progress as he learns whether his new approach can keep productivity, quality and kudos high.  Help him maintain leadership credibility by requiring training for the whole department hand having him participate.

How do you know when to quit dodging your responsibility and to use the third option? A truthful and global costing out is crucial.  See original article for details.

Take into account the effects of his behavior on:

• Productivity.
• Time spent by HR, staff and supervisors in all departments talking about incidents and dealing with complaints and hurt feelings.
• Effects on inter-departmental interactions.
• Transfer and turnover of good employees, especially outstanding young people who would be the next generation of leaders.
• Monetary and emotional costs of facilitated negotiations that fail.
• Costs for litigation, lawyers and buying silence from many employees.
• Lost respect for you and lost passion for your mission and goals, which will infect the organization.

You may have heard the expression, “People don’t leave organizations; they leave bad supervisors.”  That’s much too simplistic.

Once you have competitive benefits, great people leave bad environments – including poor supervisors, peers and coworkers, and systems that thwart accomplishment.  The most effective way of keeping the best employees and managers is setting high standards and standing up for them.

Remember, your leadership is on trial also.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Stop Bullies: Make Some People Uncomfortable, Upset, Angry

Many children are raised with a set of rules such as: “Don’t make anyone uncomfortable.  Don’t hurt people’s feelings.  Don’t upset anyone.  Don’t be disagreeable.  Don’t argue.  Be polite.  Be nice.  Follow the Golden Rule.  Make everyone like you.”  But those are not effective rules for adults in the real-world. Of course, we know why we teach children those values.  Who wants to raise hostile, nasty, argumentative, vicious, abusive bullies?

I’m not encouraging bullies to be nastier.  I’m talking with nice, decent adults who are being harassed, tormented, controlled, abused and bullied, and yet who hesitate to speak up or to protect and defend themselves effectively because they don’t want to break those childhood rules.

Mary is a typical example.  She held her tongue in public when her toxic mother abused her.  She held her tongue when relatives criticized, mocked and demeaned her.  She held her tongue when friends told her what she should do to be the good friend they wanted.

She held her tongue but she built up huge resentment that eventually exploded.

With friends and a few relatives, either she’d get in a fight so she could be righteously angry, blame them and never talk to them again or she’d nurse a cold fury until she felt justified in simply cutting them off completely without explanation.

With her parents, she’d explode and tell them off.  Then she’d feel guilty for being so mean and she’d come back groveling and apologizing.  Nevertheless, she still felt she was the one who’d been wronged and she resented the price her toxic parents made her pay for forgiving her outburst.

With strangers, she sat quietly and never shared what she thought or what she was interested in.  She didn’t want to make them uncomfortable and she was afraid of hurting their feelings or raising a subject that would be contentious.  Most people thought she wasn’t very bright.

Mary was also a master of self-bullying. She’d flagellate herself with self-doubt and self-questioning.  She’d obsess on every slight taken or given and always end up blaming herself.  And she’d judge herself as guilty, no matter what they’d done to her.  She was never perfect.  Her anxiety, stress and negative self-talk led to sleeplessness, loss of confidence and self-esteem, and to depression.

Mary had two underlying and interlocking problems:

1. The set of rules that made “not upsetting people” her most important value, no matter what.
2. Having only all-or-none responses of holding back totally or exploding.  In a sense, she could remain at zero mph or she could go 100 mph, but she didn’t know how to go 30-60 mph.

The solution to the first problem required that Mary examine, as an adult, the rules she’d accepted all-or-none when she was a child.  Children do think in black-or-white but adults have more experience and wisdom.  Mary could see the kernel of value in her old rules, even though her parents had used them to control her all her life.

But as an adult, she could see where those rules were insufficient and what changes were necessary:

• She felt the pain of all the times she’d made those rules the most important ones instead of protecting herself.  She could now see situations in which speaking up or pushing back verbally in order to defend herself were more important values.
• She could see the difference between people sharing their tastes and opinions, versus having an angry exchange with someone trying to convert her to their “absolutely right” way of seeing things.
• She could also see which subjects she simply didn’t want to discuss with which people.
• One of the most compelling moments was when she saw which people she did want to disagree with, whether or not they were uncomfortable or had hurt feelings, because to be “nice” to them would have violated her most important values.  In fact, she reached a point where making a few people, like her toxic mother, uncomfortable or angry was a sign that Mary was on the right track.

She changed her old, out-dated and ineffective beliefs to new, effective ones, encapsulated in the phrase, “Not hurting people’s feelings is a much lower priority than protecting myself or being myself.  I’ll speak what I think and say what I want in the nicest, firmest way and if they don’t like it, it’s their problem.  That way I’ll test whether I want to allow them to be on my Isle of Song.”

That simple change gave her a rush of peace, freedom and energy.  She felt powerful enough to create the life she wanted, which was more important that not making anyone uncomfortable.  She now had the will and determination to learn how to be skillful in protecting herself.

How she learned to respond clearly, simply, kindly and firmly from 30-60 mph will be the subject of another article.

Expert coaching by phone or Skype helps.  We can design a plan that fits you and your situation.  And build your will and skill to carry it out effectively.