Don't let employee with bad attitude prevail

Attitude is critical.  If your attitude is good, then misunderstandings, disappointments and adversity can be handled professionally and kept from escalating in serious problems. But a poor attitude can turn even minor issues into a job-threatening mess.

To read the rest of this article from the Denver Business Journal, see: Don’t let employee with bad attitude prevail http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2005/03/14/smallb2.html

For example: Opal was a young employee, new to a well-functioning team.  Her supervisor had already acknowledged that Opal was bright, competent, personable and likely to be a star.  Unfortunately, in Opal’s mind, she already was a star and entitled to celebrity treatment.

Like other team members, Opal was allowed to work four ten-hour days as long as she adjusted her schedule with the rest of the team to ensure coverage at all times.  But Opal rapidly began taking advantage, setting her own schedule without consulting anyone and taking time off at the beginning and end of the day.

These seemed like minor incidents to her supervisor, who reminded Opal of the team agreement about coordinating schedules and pointed out that she was alienating some people.  Opal became visibly upset and argued vehemently that she deserved special treatment.

Opal took a minor, easily fixed issue and escalated it into a big problem.  Opal’s supervisor told her that the agreement to coordinate flextime was the way it was.  Opal retorted that she didn’t like it and her supervisor could expect her to be displeased and show it.

Opal dimmed her own rising star with her bad attitude, made worse because she was so blatantly self-centered and oblivious to team processes.

Opal then reported her displeasure to her boss’s boss.  Later, when Opal’s supervisor took her for coffee, Opal was smug.  She was sure her supervisor had been reprimanded for not handling her the way she wanted.

But Opal’s supervisor hadn’t been reprimanded.  She had a well-deserved reputation for being a considerate, calm person who built highly productive, caring teams - and her boss assumed Opal was the problem.

Opal’s supervisor told her she expected Opal to “display a wonderful attitude toward me and the rest of the team members, whatever your feelings.”

Opal’s supervisor gave her a great gift by having private conversations, being clear about what it took to rise in that company and offering specific advice to help Opal get back on track.

This was a crucial time for Opal.  She hadn’t gotten what she wanted and had thrown a fit.  She’d acted like she did when she was a child facing her mother – using emotional intimidation and bullying to get her way.  If she didn’t change her attitudes, she’d lose her job.

A major test for us is, what do we do when we’ve made mistakes, been reprimanded or been defeated.  Look at the 100 richest people in the world, the 100 greatest people in all of history, the 100 greatest athletes.  They’ve all made mistakes, been dressed down and defeated … and their setbacks have usually been in public.

If you were Opal’s supervisor, what would you do to try to save a potential star?  Some suggestions are: See whole article for details.

• Meet away from the office for only one heart-to-heart talk about attitudes required for success.
• Set clear boundaries – “show this behavior or else” - and stick to them.
• Review the plan with your manager, including a plan if Opal continues going over your head.
• Hire a coach, for two sessions maximum, so Opal hears what she needs from an outside expert.
• Don’t give more chances; don’t reward Opal in hopes she’ll like you and act better.
• Don’t wallow in self-doubt - you wouldn’t get better results if you were sweeter, kinder and gentler. Opal’s mother never did.

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.

To move up, be willing to take risks, responsibilities

If you think your company keeps you from advancing appropriately, you’re not alone.  But even if your organization’s leadership isn’t clear or doesn’t play fair, the responsibility for rising is yours. For example, at a particular company many managers often complained about the reasons their company hadn’t encouraged their promotion to leadership positions.

To read the rest of this article from the Business Journal of Jacksonville, see: To move up, be willing to take risks, responsibilities http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2005/12/26/smallb2.html

But all their explanations revolved around their fear and hesitancy.  They blamed eternal circumstances, they were waiting for someone else to make their paths simple and easy, and they took no individual responsibility.

But external conditions are not the problem.  Conditions may be difficult or easy, but the problem is always in the individual.

One of the managers, Dave, had an epiphany: He was the problem.  His boss had said the same thing during their mentoring sessions.  His boss had said that Dave had passed the first test – he was competent and the boss could trust his numbers.

Next, his boss wanted to know if Dave had enough ambition and courage to take the initiative for his next steps; to speak up professionally at meetings, to risk being corrected and to learn in public.

There was no clear and specific list of stepping-stones for promotion, like there was when Dave was learning technical skills and was told exactly what would be on each test and how the test would be given.

This was the real world.  Tests were frequent and came without warning.  People didn’t play fair and there were winners and losers.

Also, Dave would have to deal with the way things are, not how he wants them to be.  For example, if Dave had hurt feelings in a hostile interaction with his boss, Dave would have to rebuild the bridge between them.  His boss wouldn’t approach him to make Dave feel better.

His boss could help him, but the ultimate responsibility for success would lie with Dave.  Was he willing to struggle and learn to play the game?

The fact is that path to advancement is never risk-free.  You will get your wrists slapped in public.  But if you never take those risks, you won’t advance.

As Wayne Gretzky said, “You miss 100 percent of the shots you don’t take.”  In order to advance, Dave would have to impose his ambition and will on himself in order to overcome his fear and hesitancy.

What happened to Dave?  You may be expecting me to say that Dave’s real name is Sam Walton or Bill Gates.

No, Dave is simply Dave.  But he succeeded in his first steps.  He’s ambitious: he got help and took the responsibility and risk, and he has been promoted.

Often, people need coaching to help them overcome their hesitancy and self-bullying, and to build the strength, courage, determination and skill needed to take the right risks in a way that increases their chances of success.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Managers must be proactive to effectively handle smear campaigns

Suppose you’ve bitten the bullet and fired an employee for cause such as fraud, harassment or behavior inconsistent with your organization’s values.  And now your reputation is being tarnished because the employee and his friends are bad mouthing you.  They want to generate fear of and antagonism toward management. To read the rest of this article from Business First of Louisville, see: Managers must be proactive to effectively handle smear campaigns http://louisville.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2006/11/06/editorial4.html

Your overall goals are to resist the insidious smear campaign, maintain your reputation and establish the company’s support of its values and integrity, especially when dealing with sensitive personal information.  But, even though you have good evidence to justify firing the employee in question, you can’t reveal confidential, personal information in your defense and you want to minimize the risk of a defamation claim.

How can you get your side of the story across?

Here are some suggestions – see the complete article:

A great cue card for a conversation is: “We don’t discuss our employees’ personal issues with their co-workers because those issues are confidential.  I’m sure you wouldn’t want your personal issues discussed with others.”

“Unfortunately, sometimes, employees who have left the company or their supporters provide incorrect or incomplete information about their separations.  This starts rumors in the workplace and is very disruptive.  I’m glad that you came to me with your concerns.  I hope you understand that we need to take the ‘high road’ and continue to maintain these matters in confidence.”

Of course, some people will enjoy thinking the worst of you but most people will give you the benefit of the doubt if they’ve come to trust your integrity and judgment.  They’ll base their judgments on what you say and do day-to-day, before there’s a situation like an employee’s sudden dismissal to deal with.

If have a reputation for being open, honest and trustworthy, your employees will be more likely to accept that you acted with cause even if you can’t outline the specifics.

But if you’ve earned a reputation for being arbitrary and autocratic, employees will believe the worst – no matter what really happened.

Ultimately, you expect good employees to understand the need for confidentiality.

In addition to value statements containing general words such as trust, integrity, honesty and respect, specifically state company values as situational expectations of behavior. For example:

• We aren’t negative, don’t grumble, don’t feed the rumor mill, and don’t leave anonymous hate mail.  If we have an issue with someone or some decision that affects performance – not just a matter of personal taste or style – we go directly to the source and talk appropriately and professionally.
• If we don’t get what we want, then continued participation in negativity, the rumor mill and smear campaigns is participation in a one-sided attack on management, and will be evaluated as behavior below standards of team performance.

Sometimes, the smear campaigners, like terrorists, will attack you for stifling free speech.  Stand your ground.  We always put limits on what we say in public.  For example, free speech does not include shouting “fire” in a crowded theater, slander or promoting treason.

Legitimate leaders must take a strong stand to resist smear campaigns or they’ll create a power vacuum that will attract the most hostile and ruthless seekers of power.

Phoebe Prince Suicide Alerts Us to Stop School Bullies

Maybe the suicide of 15-year-old Phoebe Prince will finally wake us up.  Maybe the articles in the New York Times, Huffington Post, People magazine and dozens of others will wake us up.  Maybe the long list of charges against the bullies and tormentors will finally goad the public to demand strong action.  Maybe charges of statutory rape, violation of civil rights with bodily injury, harassment and stalking will get a stronger response from the district attorney than, “The inactions of some of the adults at the school are troublesome.” Phoebe’s suicide is another red alert.  But we know that hundreds of other children in our schools are being bullied, harassed, tormented and abused every day.  And parents and school officials are not protecting these targets of bullying.  Some of these kids will gain strength by fighting back effectively against these predators.

Others will be overwhelmed and destroyed by the bullying, but even more, by the lack of protection by the very adults who have taken on the responsibility to protect them.  These kids will grow up concluding that they are helpless and their situations are hopeless.  They will grow up with debilitating, negative self-talk, with anxiety, stress and depression, with little confidence and low self-esteem.

We don’t need more suicides to remind us of what we saw at our own schools, what we see in our adult personal relationships and the interactions we observe at work.  We know the depths to which humans can sink.  We know how alert and courageous we must be to prevent the worst consequences.

A huge number of people failed in Massachusetts.  Start with the two boys and four girls between the ages of 16 to 18 who have been charged as adults.  Continue with the three minors who have been charged as juveniles.  Continue with their parents.  Their parents failed to teach and control their children.  Of course it’s difficult to teach and control teenagers.  But will those parents now defend their venomous children or will they stand with Phoebe Prince?

I think the greatest failure is that of the school authorities, especially the principal and the district administrators who set the tone for the teachers and staff.  They pretend to be education experts.  They pretend to be worthy to teach children.  Yet none would stand up for Phoebe or for the other girl in school who was bullied by one of the accused teenagers.

We know that there are difficulties and that they will hide behind the lie that “we didn’t know how bad it was.”  So what?  Personally as a parent and grandparent, professionally as a coach, consultant and expert on how to stop bullies I say that these people represent failure and should be forced to go into jobs in which their tasks don’t matter.

Would you want someone who pleads “difficulties” as an excuse for their failures when your life is on the line – for example, a school bus driver, a doctor, a pilot, a cop, a fire fighter, a repairman of train tracks, a quality control worker on an assembly line for your medication, pacemaker or your car’s brakes or accelerator?  I wouldn’t give them the responsibility.  All that education has been wasted on them.  And maybe the type of education currently in how-to-be-a-teacher courses is a waste.

Then there’s the rest of us: the legislators who didn’t pass laws and demand policies and programs that would protect courageous principals from law suits by the bullying parents of bullying kids; the parents who didn’t demand the best from their legislators or the enforcement of strong anti-bullying programs by their principals; the by-standers who looked the other way and remained uninvolved; the citizens who won’t pay teachers enough to attract courageous and good ones; the unions that protect their failures from consequences.

Whether the abuse is cyber-bullying, physical violence, sexual attacks or the many varieties of mean and vicious verbal and emotional abuse – the spite, gossip, rumor-mongering, ostracism, targeting or mocking – there will always be “experts” who say “it’s not so bad,” lawyers who say that it’s too difficult to write enforceable laws, and there will always be difficulties in stopping harassment, bullying and abuse.  So what if there are difficulties?  If we can’t overcome those difficulties, we don’t deserve the responsibility and trust, and we will reap the bitter fruits that will await us in our hours of need.

End frustration: Stop shouting, spanking and bullying your kids

An article by Hillary Stout in the New York Times, “For Some Parents, Shouting is the New Spanking,” focuses on the damage to children done by parents’ shouting and, therefore, the need for parents to control their tempers. Although I agree that a steady diet of shouting and bullying isn’t a good way for well-meaning, devoted parents to act, the experts in the article miss the real source of the problem and, therefore, the real solution.

Those experts point out that the proper way to be a good parent is “never spank their children,” “friend our teenagers,” “spend hours teaching our elementary-school offspring how to understand their feelings,” “reminding, nagging, timeout, counting 1-2-3” and “have a good interaction based on reason.”

I disagree with their basic assumptions about good parenting and their solution that parents should control their tempers.

Of course, repeated sarcasm, criticism, beatings and abuse are bad parenting.  I’m talking here to frustrated, well-meaning, devoted parents; not abusive bullies.

Good parenting sometimes involves spanking, has nothing to do with “friending,” is not focused on teaching children to merely understand their feelings and is not usually about good interactions based on reason.  Reason is only a small part of being an effective parent, especially when the children are young.

Children are exquisitely adept at knowing your true limitations and which buttons to push.  It’s a survival skill for them.  They know exactly how many times you’ll yell before you act.  They distinguish between yelling and threatening that won’t be followed up, and the “Mom” or “Dad” look and voice that means you will act.  And they perform a precise calculus based on how much they’ll get the next time versus a punishment and your guilt this time.  They know when they can get unreasonable and stubborn, and win.  They also know that if you blow up and yell now, they’ll win later.

Winning those battles won’t increase their self-esteem.  Pushing their parents around will make them insecure.

What leads to repeated shouting is frustration.  Those parents have so limited their allowed responses that they’re no longer effective – the kids know that they don’t have to do what the parents want and nothing serious will happen.  Those parents have taught their children to be stubborn and unreasonable in order to win.  See the case study of Paula as she stops being bullied by her daughter Stacy in "How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks."

Those parents’ lack of creativity and effectiveness increases their frustration until they blow up and shout.  Then those parents feel guilty, apologize, give the kids more power and set in motion the next cycle of not getting listened to leading to more frustration and further shouting.

The solution is for parents to take charge and be parents – speak and act straight.  Decide – as age, stage and specific kid appropriate – what decisions you make and when the child simply must obey, and what decisions the kid gets to make and within what limits.  In your areas, it’s nice if the child understands your needs and reasons, but you’ll never convince a two or sixteen year-old by reasoning that your way is best and they should be happy not getting what they want.

Sometimes you must be firm about your sense of urgency, which is not matched by theirs.  Sometimes, your needs and wishes must be taken into account.  You’re not their slave or servant all the time.  They don’t get what they want every time.  More important than helping them understand their feelings is teaching them how to deal effectively when they’re feeling demanding or angry or frustrated or needy.

And some kids seem to want to be punished sometimes.  Really, they do.  And they feel much better afterward.  When you’ve gone through the sequence of reminding and timeout without effect, a spank is sometimes the best thing to do.

Your frustration and shouting is a message to you that you’re not being effective.  You need to do more than merely learn the latest technique; you need to change the limits you place on yourself.  That will open up other ways to making them do what you need when you’re under pressure.

Good parenting means that you can say, “Here’s the way it is.  I need to move fast and I insist that you do the same.”  Or “You don’t vote on this decision and we’ll talk about it later.”  Of course, you will talk about it later.  Or “I’m not taking you there today.  I need to unwind right now over a latte.  I love you.  Now go read and leave me alone for a while.”  Of course, most of the time we devoted parents will take them to places they want to go.

Don’t reason more than once with a five year-old who doesn’t want to brush her teeth, “You’re making a bad decision,” as those experts suggest.  Simply say, “In our family, we brush our teeth, so you will.”

It’s not, as those experts say, that “Yelling parents reflect a complete inability to express themselves in any meaningful, thoughtful, useful or constructive way.”  It’s that yelling parents aren’t allowing themselves to express the right thought, which is that “I, the parent, am drawing the line here and you will do what I want.  I have good reasons.  I hope you understand now and I know you’ll understand later.  But even if you don’t understand, you will do what I want now.”

In addition to what I learned professionally, we have six, now-grown children who taught me that well-meaning parents yell when they’re irritable, anxious, pressured, overwhelmed and frustrated because they don’t know how else to make things work for them

Facing a two-faced coworker

My advice was asked on this situation on condition that the author remains anonymous.  What would you do if you faced a two-faced coworker or teammate who treated you civilly in public but attacked you when you were alone?  And no one else in the office knew or would believe you. In public, Bart (fictitious name) smiled and seemed helpful to Fran (fictitious name).  Even though he didn’t know her specialty, he started offering polite, detailed suggestions in an authoritative and convincing way about how she could improve her performance.  Fran felt like she was being micro-managed in a way she couldn’t resist or argue back.  It would take too long to show why his suggestions wouldn’t work and she didn’t think everyone else was really interested.  Other members of the team started to think she was pretty incompetent since Bart knew so much more.

In private, Fran asked Bart to stop being so controlling and making her look bad.  He agreed to, but then he continued to subtly demean her in public.  In addition, he started ignoring her, leaving her out of the information loop, and putting her down subtly in front of others.  Fran again asked him to stop.  Bart said he wanted them to have a good working relationship and suggested a meeting to clear the air.  Fran was initially wary, but he persisted and she agreed.

At the private meeting, Bart told Fran she was the worst person he'd ever worked with.  She wasn’t completely bad professionally, but she had the worst personality he’d ever seen.  He wanted her to treat him with as much friendliness as she treated other people in public.  Fran was mystified because he didn't say who these other people were and she thought she already treated everyone politely and professionally.

He said Fran was bullying him, he couldn't sleep at night because of her, she was just as hostile and nasty as another girl he used to work with and his girlfriend agreed that Fran was bullying him, even though Fran had never met her.  He said he’d been verbally cruel to people in the past, but he didn't want to be with her.  He said Fran was the worst person he'd ever worked with and the worst thing about his otherwise perfect job.

Fran felt scared because nothing like this had ever happened to her before and because Bart said everything very quietly and calmly with a twisted look of pure hate on his face.  He seemed to be enjoying it.  Fran had never seen him look or act this particular way before, so she thought others wouldn't believe her.

He carried on this way for an hour and Fran felt like she was in the presence of a psycho.  She apologized profusely.  He kept twisting the knife.  She said she was sorry for “bullying” him.  He kept twisting the knife.  She asked how she could make things better between them.  He kept twisting the knife.

Since she had to work with him closely, Fran pretended to be his friend from that day on.  She followed up two weeks later to see if he was happier.  He said he no longer thought of her at night, but added that he hated her because of the way she treated him.  He didn’t stop correcting her in public and he continued to sabotage her work.

Don’t waste time psychoanalyzing Bart and Fran or thinking that some trust building exercises, communication techniques or skillful conflict resolution will bring them together.  Fran should realize that she and Bart live on different planets.  She thinks she’s okay and he’s a scary psycho.  He hates her guts, thinks she bullies him and that professional behavior allows him to vent his feelings and hatred.

In her world, she’s faced with a relentless, crazy person who blames everything on her and is out to get her.  In that office, she’ll always feel his hatred shooting into her back.  She’s also afraid he might blow and physically harm her.  She must be willing to skillfully fight a work war against a fanatic or have her credibility and reputation destroyed.  Or leave.  For example; see my article in the Denver Business Journal on winning a work-war.

Notice that every time she tried to please him by taking the blame or being nice, he only twisted the knife more.  Fran’s comment that she never met his girlfriend probably shows that she thinks she can prove her case with reasoning, logic and good will because everyone will listen and be objective.

There are many other variants of the two-faced, bullying colleague.  Some stealth bullies spread rumors and lies behind your back.  Some cut you down behind your back.  Some drive a wedge between you and other people by telling them that you said bad things about them.  These back-stabbers always work in the dark and can’t be pinned down

My books, CDs and coaching can help.

What did Fran do?  Fran secretly hated Bart for what he had put her through.  She didn’t want to become buddies with him.  Also, she didn’t want to waste her time proving to everyone how mean and crazy he was.  Three month's later, she secured another job and left.  Since then, she’s been happy at the new job.

That’s one effective solution to deal with people like Bart, but what will Fran do if she encounters another one.  For example, if she’s highly skilled and competent, she’ll make someone else jealous, scared and angry.  If she’s beautiful, she’ll arouse these same feelings in some other women.

What would you do if you were Fran?