In the relationship-leadership approach, the manager and employee have a courageous conversation, an open discussion as to what is really going on. From this honesty and openness the right solution appears. Reconciliation as well as resolution occurs.

Our two examples above are real clients. In Tom's situation, he needed some help learning new sales skills but had been afraid to ask for help. He feared he would be labeled as "incompetent." In Tami's situation, she did not really understand what was expected of her. Her inexperienced boss recognized his limitations to guide her development in mastering the skills required for success in her new position. He got her the help she needed from another department. In the end, both became successful performers.

The relationship-leadership approach to managing people differs from traditional management practices in many subtle ways. To demonstrate the difference, we will look at an alternative way of dealing with an employee's poor perform-ance.

Let's start with a story. Tom just joined the organization as a salesman. He comes to the organization with an out-standing track record in technical sales. However, his new company sells investment services to very wealthy people. Selling a service is quite different from selling a tangible product. As a result, he will have to develop some new sales skills. Tom is regarded as an exceptional sales talent, so both Tom and his boss are confident he will be successful.

Tami has been with the company several years, always performed well and is regarded as a talented, loyal employee. She was recently promoted into a highly technical position reporting to a manager who has been with the organization for only two months. Tami is looking to her boss for direction on what she should be doing but her new boss is still trying to figure out the "lay of the land."

After only four weeks, it is clear that both Tom and Tami are failing in their new jobs. If they don't quickly make dramatic improvement, the Senior Vice President who their managers report to will insist that they be removed from their positions. Their managers are in a bind. It is a tight labor market; neither employee can easily be replaced.

If you were Tom's or Tami's manager, how would you handle these two situations? How would you drive home the message, "Your job is on the line; if you don't immediately improve your performance, I can't help you. You'll be history."

Traditionally, improving performance involves observing an individual's performance and working on that employee to ‘fix' the behavior. The focus is on correcting weaknesses.

The traditional process for ‘fixing' behavior is:

1. Get the employee to acknowledge that the undesired behavior exists.

2. Create an understanding of the reason why such behavior is unacceptable.

3. Agree that it is the employee's responsibility to change the behavior.

This method seldom works because it is based upon coercion. No permanent, positive change ever happens when an employee feels threatened or forced to change. Fear never creates a positive leaning environment.

The relationship-leadership approach focuses on 1) the employees understanding of why they are not meeting expectations, and 2) the manager and employee work together to remedy the problem. Some common reasons for an employee not performing are:

1. Not understanding what is expected and why (a communications issue).

2. Not having the necessary talent, cognitive ability, required educational tools, or Emotional Intelligence (square peg, round hole syndrome).

3. Not having the skills or knowledge required to meet the expectations (a training issue).

4. Not wanting to do the task as expected because: Values or interests different than those required by the job, or fear. Fear of failure, success, rejection or abandonment.

In the relationship-leadership approach, the manager and employee have a courageous conversation, an open discussion as to what is really going on. From this honesty and openness the right solution appears. Reconciliation as well as resolution occurs.

Our two examples above are real clients. In Tom's situation, he needed some help learning new sales skills but had been afraid to ask for help. He feared he would be labeled as "incompetent." In Tami's situation, she did not really understand what was expected of her. Her inexperienced boss recognized his limitations to guide her development in mastering the skills required for success in her new position. He got her the help she needed from another department. In the end, both became successful performers.

N

Tami has been with the company several years, always performed well and is regarded as a talented, loyal employee. She was recently promoted into a highly technical position reporting to a manager who has been with the organization for only two months. Tami is looking to her boss for direction on what she should be doing but her new boss is still trying to figure out the "lay of the land."

After only four weeks, it is clear that both Tom and Tami are failing in their new jobs. If they don't quickly make dramatic improvement, the Senior Vice President who their managers report to will insist that they be removed from their positions. Their managers are in a bind. It is a tight labor market; neither employee can easily be replaced.

If you were Tom's or Tami's manager, how would you handle these two situations? How would you drive home the message, "Your job is on the line; if you don't immediately improve your performance, I can't help you. You'll be history."

Traditionally, improving performance involves observing an individual's performance and working on that employee to ‘fix' the behavior. The focus is on correcting weaknesses.

The traditional process for ‘fixing' behavior is:

1. Get the employee to acknowledge that the undesired behavior exists.

2. Create an understanding of the reason why such behavior is unacceptable.

3. Agree that it is the employee's responsibility to change the behavior.

This method seldom works because it is based upon coercion. No permanent, positive change ever happens when an employee feels threatened or forced to change. Fear never creates a positive leaning environment.

The relationship-leadership approach focuses on 1) the employees understanding of why they are not meeting expectations, and 2) the manager and employee work together to remedy the problem. Some common reasons for an employee not performing are:

1. Not understanding what is expected and why (a communications issue).

2. Not having the necessary talent, cognitive ability, required educational tools, or Emotional Intelligence (square peg, round hole syndrome).

3. Not having the skills or knowledge required to meet the expectations (a training issue).

4. Not wanting to do the task as expected because: Values or interests different than those required by the job, or fear. Fear of failure, success, rejection or abandonment.

In the relationship-leadership approach, the manager and employee have a courageous conversation, an open discussion as to what is really going on. From this honesty and openness the right solution appears. Reconciliation as well as resolution occurs.

Our two examples above are real clients. In Tom's situation, he needed some help learning new sales skills but had been afraid to ask for help. He feared he would be labeled as "incompetent." In Tami's situation, she did not really understand what was expected of her. Her inexperienced boss recognized his limitations to guide her development in mastering the skills required for success in her new position. He got her the help she needed from another department. In the end, both became successful performers.

HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.diggitup.net/article/21345/diggitup-Dealing-With-Poor-Performance.html">Dealing With Poor Performance</a>

BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.diggitup.net/article/21345/diggitup-Dealing-With-Poor-Performance.html]Dealing With Poor Performance[/url]

Related Articles:

Careers In Nursing

Nursing is one of the fastest growing fields today. This article shows you how to break into this lucrative and rewarding career.

Public Funding Assistance for Quality Management Systems Consulting and Training

Companies of all sizes can benefit from a variety of local, state and federal funding assistance programs to improve their quality management systems and upgrade employee skills. This broad definition covers ISO, Six Sigma, Lean, change management, leadership and basic skills training. Some of these programs offer matching funds while others provide tax credits. A few even bestow outright grants. However, gaining access to - and understanding - these funding programs can be a daunting task. That is why it pays to select a management consulting firm that knows how to navigate these often bewildering waters.

Implementing Total Quality Management In Small, Medium And Big Organizations - An Observation

It has been a challenge to implement Total Quality Management (TQM) in many organizations. What are some of the Critical Success Factors in implementing TQM? In this TQM article, the author shared his experience acquired from companies he has worked with as a consultant/Facilitator as well as implementer.

Bookmark it: