Interesting Discussion When Employees Don't Follow Procedures

U

Umang Vidyarthi

Wouldn't it be a shame if you lost good workers because simple rebellion wasn't the real problem? All of those trained employees would be out the door and must be replaced, tsk tsk. Very expensive! And your company's secrets, if you had any, went with them. Surely there is a better way of dealing with resistance!

This article is number 4 in the Stealth Quality Series.

I had already promised Arresting Absenteeism would be number 3, but have not written that yet as this subject surfaced recently and seemed to need a good airing. I'll start on absenteeism soon. Thanks for your patience--be well!

Hi Jennifer,
Supercagifragilisticexpialidocious!!Don't rush to a Dic.This simply means
'SUPERB'
Thanks a lot for the enlightening article.This is a day to day problem,faced by all at the work place,at one or the other time.Your effort to provide solutions is laudable.
:applause:
 
C

CoKoOPERATOR

Mmm .
That is a fine article.
:applause:
But what if an employee comes every day late at work , is not assisting his partners (colleages) and does complete the daily reports.
Would the method described at the article apply to this problem ?
:confused:
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
Mmm .
That is a fine article.
:applause:
But what if an employee comes every day late at work , is not assisting his partners (colleages) and does complete the daily reports.
Would the method described at the article apply to this problem ?
:confused:
Thank you for your compliment. :eek:

The flow chart in the article addresses the very real possibility that the employee is not value added. Some conditions like Oppositional Defiant Disorder While it may be tempting to address the employee with authority :whip: that may not be the right approach. (Note: ODD is listed as a child's disorder. That presumes only children have it; some people would simply say the child is "spoiled"--and arguably that could be the case, and just as arguably adults could become "spoiled" too.)

Let's suppose the employee is an otherwise ernest person, and comes well recommended by past employers. The employee might:

Be working under or over his/her job capacity.
Have the wrong supervisor and/or coworkers.
Be better suited to working completely alone.
Have personal problems outside the workplace.
Feel marginalized for some reason.

Those are all problems that could possibly be resolved without a lot of expense or fuss. Employees are usually matched to jobs, whereas some people may contribute more value if their jobs were designed for them. Your willingness to do that depends on the returns of your investment in that process.

To know if the investment is expected to be worthwhile, you will need a clear understanding of that that employee's value would be if he was performing at his best. The Quality Costs Calculators could be adapted to help compute that.

Many managers would not bother with such a task. They would simply say "You're fired" and try again with another employee. Then the subject becomes one of turnover costs. I have an article for that too, of course.

There, have I made that complicated enough? :lol: It's all so easy to say, but not so easy to do...
 
C

CoKoOPERATOR

:applause:Thanks for the reply. :applause:
You helped me much.
You are correct about the fact that most managers do not bother much with the internal world of each employee's life.
But you know, it is difficult to say to somebody to find assistance for his or her problems that mix with the procedures.
Anyway, thanks for your guidance.
:thanx:
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
But you know, it is difficult to say to somebody to find assistance for his or her problems that mix with the procedures. Anyway, thanks for your guidance. :thanx:

You're welcome.

And yes, it is hard to tell someone to find assistance for his/her personal problems. Some organizations include mental health in their insurance benefits. Some organizations have lists in Human Resources where a person can confidentially find resources like credit counseling. The U.S. has the United Way with its directories of local resources for all sorts of needs, including substance abuse, domestic abuse, family counseling, elder care and assistance with expenses for the poor--like heating oil.

It can be a delicate matter to offer this to an individual unless he asks. However, if said individual is negatively impacting performance, the organization is right to pursue a solution. Employee counseling is usually the first step--and I don't mean "Shape up or (fill in the blank)."

Here in the U.S. there has been workplace violence by troubled employees, and in the armed forces they used to say "Your family doesn't come in your seabag/bootkit/etc." but they now know that people perform better, and are safer when unfettered by solvable burdens.

So the first thing you can do is ask your HR deparment to assemble a list of resources for people who might need them. Pamphlets could be placed in places where they can be casually slipped into a pocket--often people do not want to advertise they are having some personal difficulty. If there is something (like personal financial management) your company can help provide, set up a way to do it.

Beyond this advice I want to caution you to take care. Consult your legal department if you feel concern enough to do so. Then, armed with your options, assemble a small team of managers and ask each other what offocial approach they think is the right one, and set it as policy.
 
Q

QC Kid

A very interesting article. It clearly gives reasons why employees may act as they do in the work place. It makes me wonder why some of the attitudes you may experience at work with certain people are not the same attitudes at home. It must be pressure. Trying to meet unrealistic deadlines, unbalanced work loads, the snap of a new whip, substandard equipment, and insufficient resources. These things tend to aggrivate anyone. Please explain how these have no affect on an employees behavior and why good employees should not walk out.

Good managment is from the earned respect of those you manage.
A failure on their part is a direct result of management's failure to do their part.

ps. I noticed management was not part of your flow chart. To simplify your process for termination I would start with management. Less steps to a meaningful solution.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Leader
Admin
A very interesting article. It clearly gives reasons why employees may act as they do in the work place. It makes me wonder why some of the attitudes you may experience at work with certain people are not the same attitudes at home. It must be pressure. Trying to meet unrealistic deadlines, unbalanced work loads, the snap of a new whip, substandard equipment, and insufficient resources. These things tend to aggrivate anyone. Please explain how these have no affect on an employees behavior and why good employees should not walk out.

Good management is from the earned respect of those you manage.
A failure on their part is a direct result of management's failure to do their part.

ps. I noticed management was not part of your flow chart. To simplify your process for termination I would start with management. Less steps to a meaningful solution.

Sorry it took me so long to respond to your post.

Here in Maine, people have long been famous for their work ethic. I've come to recognize that includes the tendency to stay by one's machine and keep working through oppressive conditions and concerns about safety too.

Lately there's a complaint going around: "The work ethic is dead." Young people don't want to work, etc. Richard Florida points out in his book Rise of the Creative Class that the work ethic isn't dead among young people, but it has changed. They are less inclined to do the same repetitious and seemingly thankless work as their parents were willing to do. No, these young people want to feel a connection to the customer, to feel creative and appreciated in their jobs. How dare they??

People's willingness to put up with a bad situation depends on a lot of things. Upbringing, availability of alternatives, financial need, and their position on Maslow's pyramid, if you believe in such a thing as Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. When at home, people may act differently when they feel like they are in control, can relax in their surroundings. Unfortunately, sometimes there is also dysfunction in the home, so I guess there would also be a limit to enduring it before a person runs away.

There's no question in the minds of anyone I can think of on this forum that management's bane and burden is employee performance. Bad planning, poor execution and/or inflamed ego have no doubt undone many a project, and I struggle with how to include a step in that flow chart that informs the reader to look in the mirror for his or her problems. That flow chart is for managers, you see. It is meant to demystify employee performance, and point out that factors besides character impact performance.

So, given all that can you tell me just what you mean when you say "start with management" in that flow chart? I think you mean "Doctor, heal thyself" and if so, how to word that in a way they'll accept is something I am always ready to hear!
 

Raffy

Quite Involved in Discussions
Hi Jennifer,:thanks:
Wow, this is great!
This kind of topic should be clearly discussed with our department managers and HRD so that they would understand how a person is behaving towards the organization. This is a big help.
Thank you very much.
Best regards,
Raffy
 
Top Bottom