You Can Change Attitude Problems at Work

Increasing productivity is relatively easy because you can measure and quantify production, and then respond effectively.  But how do you fix poor attitudes, which you can’t quantify? Actually, it’s not that hard.

A list of poor attitudes typically presented to me by managers and employees includes negativity, insubordination, narcissism, hyper-sensitivity, bullying, abuse of power and lack of responsibility.

To read the rest of this article from the Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, see: You can Change Attitude Problems at Work

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2007/11/19/smallb3.html

A typical list of behaviors that result from those attitudes is: chronic gossip, back-stabbing, sarcasm, negativity, manipulation, sabotage, formation of cliques, nepotism, favoritism, critical complaining, whining, demeaning comments, bullying bosses, dishonest evaluations, flaming e-mails, disrupting meetings, abusive remarks, ignoring suggestions, “Drama Queens,” blowing up in response to feedback, turf-control, crabbiness, over-reactions, lack of communication, mind reading, people who want their minds read, pointing fingers, taking things personally, the loud, silent treatment and my all-time favorite: “not my job.”

I use a straightforward, action-oriented approach that changes company cultures infected with poor attitudes.  The key is to be clear and specific about which attitudes and behaviors you want, and then to require participation in a culture that has them.  Don’t be a conflict-avoidant manager.

How do you clarify attitudes you can’t quantify?  The first step is to acknowledge that although you can’t quantify attitudes like “narcissistic control-freak,” you can recognize and document behaviors without resorting to mind reading, moral judgments or personal attacks.  Then you can act on your documentation of non-professional versus professional behavior.

Make sure it’s legal.  Then everyone from the owner on down is required to subscribe to or sign off on the new code of professional behavior.  The code then becomes a significant part of everyone’s evaluations.  Be consistent in rewarding the desired behavior and having consequences for actions against your code.

You won’t get everyone to buy in immediately.  So what?  Band together with the core group that wants to turn things around or to improve what you already have.

As you weed out a few resistant bullies, you’ll find that merely going through the process will change most employees’ behaviors.

Reinforce your expectations with new employees; publicize your code during hiring interviews.  Don’t bring people on board who argue with the code or who think the team should adjust to accommodate their personality or favorite styles that violate your code.

If someone has toxic behavior in another department, don’t bring them into your team in hopes you can change their long-term patterns.

High standards for positive attitudes protect everyone from unprofessional behavior.  Learn what you can do to eliminate the high cost of low attitudes, behavior and performance.

All tactics are situational.  Expert coaching and consulting can help you create and implement a plan that fits you and your organization.

Catering to a few troublesome workers can backfire

It’s natural to respond to employees going through personal crises or enjoying tumultuous events, such as marriages and births. But have you volunteered to serve as therapist to some of your most troubled employees?  If so, have you asked the rest of your staff if they like your new role?

For example, Joe spent much of each day talking with people on his large team about their personal problems.  He thought his tender ministrations could turn anyone into a stellar performer.

To read the rest of this article from the Denver Business Journal, see: Catering to a few troublesome workers can backfire http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2008/04/14/smallb3.html

Joe was proud that he was a caring, people-person; a friend.  He wasn’t an insensitive, bullying, abusive, slave driver.  He wanted his team to be a family.  He expected success as a result of his people-centered approach.

However, I saw that it was the same few unprofessional performers who always needed Joe’s support and care.  For example:

• Jane lacked emotional control and blew up if she was ever asked to meet deadlines.
• Chuck always made sarcastic, personal comments about anyone who performed well.
• Bob was a negative, hostile, controlling and defensive bully.
• Joan was a smiling, manipulative, gossiping, backbiting rumor monger.

These four had chronic problems that spread their unprofessional behavior and prevented high-performance.  They weren’t solid performers who maintained their professional demeanor and productivity despite being distracted by joyous events or suffering from personal turmoil.

Joe had created a culture of entitlement.  He had to micro-manage them for them to be even a little productive.

Most of the solid performers still on Joe’s staff were looking to leave.  They felt harassed, stressed, abused and abandoned while he was doing therapy on those four underperforming employees.  Joe’s peers thought he should be reprimanded because his department was a bottle-neck.

Joe finally saw his problem and moved to fix it.  Over time, through evaluations for both productivity and behavior, he held everyone on his team accountable.  Despite the chance Joe offered them, three of the needy people did not begin to produce better or stop infecting the rest of the team.  They continued to drag down the behavior and performance standards of the team.

Typically, when people have been given many special privileges, they sue when they stop getting catered to.

However, in this case, Joe got some gifts; one of the people needed the job and started performing, two left of their own accord because the environment had “turned hostile,” and only one had to be terminated.  That person sued because of Joe’s “harassment.” But Joe had acted and documented appropriately and was vindicated.

Joe is unusual.  Most rescuing meddlers don’t change.  They’re addicted to the meddling role.  Similarly, most passive-aggressive or conflict-avoidant managers don’t change.

Re-read your job description: It probably doesn’t ask you to victimize most of your staff by catering to the emotional and psychological needs of a few people in the workplace.

Remember what Mr. Spock, from the original Star Trek, said, “Don’t sacrifice the many for the sake of the few.”  Mr. Spock was always right.

Learn what you can do to eliminate the high cost of low attitudes, behavior and performance.

All tactics are situational.  Expert coaching and consulting can help you create and implement a plan that fits you and your organization.