Management by leaning forward: confront workplace conflicts head-on to head off lawsuits.

AS A LAWYER WHO HAS PERFORMED HUNDREDS OF POSTmortems of employment problems that degenerated into lawsuits, I was struck one day by the amazing similarity between beginning skiers and struggling managers and between good skiers and successful managers. This article applies the skier-manager connection to the story of an association executive who learned to "ski the run" in the workplace. Someone who may remind you of you.

A quick ski lesson

Beginning skiers typically go through the following experience: They strap on alien-feeling and alien-looking equipment. They stagger to the top of the hill. They stare down as a wave of anxiety passes over them. A natural self-protective instinct kicks in. It says, "Gravity will make me go too fast, and I will crash. I therefore will counterbalance downhill momentum by leaning back toward the uphill slope."

However, ski instructors will tell you that to control speed and direction, you literally have to do the opposite of what your natural self-protective instinct tells you to do. You must put your weight forward on your skis--toward the downhill slope that scares you. After some practice, almost like magic, you discover that it works. The way to protect yourself from a painful fall and ski the run successfully is to do the opposite of what your instinct tells you to do.

A quick management lesson

Similar to beginning skiers, managers who face challenges in the workplace also have a natural self-protective instinct. It is avoidance. They observe a high-maintenance employee, a brewing workplace conflict, or a problem that could lead to litigation and their natural instinct says, "This could be dangerous--better give it time and space, let somebody else deal with it, or hope it goes away on its own."

Yet this instinct is just as misguided as the beginning skier's instinct to lean back on skis. It invariably makes the problem worse by eliminating opportunities to nip it in the bud or to resolve it in a constructive way. To be of any utility, the instinct to avoid must be converted into a trigger for doing the opposite. When sensing trouble, managers should move the tough issue to the top of the agenda--not the bottom. Next, they should promptly develop a game plan for dealing with the issue and then execute that plan. Managers who do this experience far less anxiety and fewer headaches. They are also the ones for whom I never have to perform a postmortem.

Your story

Let's imagine that you are the executive director of an association that provides training programs, information updates, resources, and other support for its members in the health-care industry. Among your employees are the following three, whom you consider capable and qualified but somewhat problematic:

Pam, your executive assistant. Pam most consistently meets your expectations, although you occasionally wish she showed more initiative in helping you juggle your competing responsibilities.

Bill, who is in charge of membership dues and fundraising. Bill is an outgoing, energetic person who is enthusiastic about the association's mission. However, he lacks good organizational habits. Sometimes he fails to follow up or track needed information, and he has missed deadlines for submitting government grants.

Sally, your director of education. Sally is a strong-willed individual who works hard. But you have received feedback on several occasions that the programs she puts together don't always meet members' needs. Unfortunately, she's resistant to change and quick to take offense even at constructive criticism.

The overall culture of your association is fairly relaxed and nonconfrontational. Employees generally like being there and feel that the mission of supporting members in the health-care industry is important. However, there is not a lot of accountability for results. The prevailing feeling: "We are a nonprofit organization that cares about people, not a dog-eat-dog, profit-driven corporation."

In communicating with Bill, Sally, and Pam you've tended to lean back on the skis. From time to time, you've mentioned to Bill that he needs to be better organized, especially when it comes to following up with important contributors or meeting grant deadlines. Although Bill always agrees with you, you never see a change. You worry that if you're more forceful he might leave--he is well-liked in the field after all--and you'd prefer not to lose him.

With Sally you've adopted a hands-off approach. You once confronted her about member dissatisfaction with programming. However, she responded by expressing hostility toward complaining members--and suggested you might have a problem understanding her approach because you are so much younger than she. After encountering these red flags, you decided a safer course would be to back off.

As for Pam, you've never talked to her about showing more initiative and, frankly, you've never talked much to her about the things she does well.

Shifting your weight forward

While you still value the people-friendly culture and shared sense of mission in your association, you believe that clearly setting and communicating expectations and maintaining accountability would be beneficial. In fact, you realize that a stronger focus on expectations, including measuring results, will further your association's mission and contribute to an increased sense of purpose and contribution among employees and members. As a result, you make a personal commitment to put your weight forward on the skis. Here's what you do:

D-I-S Honesty. You begin by practicing this technique every day. As issues arise regarding employees' performance, attendance, or conduct, you "D-I-S" them by being direct, immediate, and specific.

The more important or sensitive the issue, the more you make sure to address it directly. You never delegate the sensitive stuff to a subordinate to communicate or substitute e-mail for face-to-face communication.

You also no longer put off confronting problems but deal with them at the first opportunity. Immediate may not always mean that very second. However, it always means the first opportunity. So when Sally starts heating up after you speak to her about member dissatisfaction and you feel your own anger starting to rise, you call a time out: "Sally, I can see that you're becoming angry, and I may become angry as well. I want us to work this problem out and don't think anger will help. Let's take an hour to cool down. Please come to my office at 3 p.m. so that we can resume the discussion of how we can best meet our members' programming needs."

Concerning the "S," this means taking a little extra time and effort to identify with precision the gap between expectations and reality. Instead of telling Bill that you are generally dissatisfied with his organizational skills, you tell him exactly what the problem is, including specific examples of deadlines missed, information not tracked, people not followed up with--and the consequences.

The honesty part of D-I-S Honesty means no more white lies or sugarcoating of the truth. You decide that your employees are entitled to the respect inherent in being told truthfully where they stand. You reject rationalizations, such as "I don't want to discourage him," or "If I tell her the truth, I'll have a big argument on my hands," or "If I tell the truth, I might get sued."

Finally, you consider D-I-S Honesty as it relates to your evaluation process, asking whether your association's performance review process encourages you or other managers to rationalize. Think of that term as a two-word contraction for "rational lies"--an avoidance technique used even by managers of integrity to convince themselves that honesty is not the best policy. Rather than allowing or encouraging "false positives," change the evaluation process or even scrap it if necessary. The only real beneficiaries of rationalization are plaintiffs' lawyers, who will use a phony evaluation to attack management's credibility.

Relaying the message. Recognizing the potential impact of your new commitment to weight-forward management on your employees--especially Bill and Sally--you decide to talk with them sooner rather than later.

Instead of waiting until the next time Bill misses a grant deadline or a member complains about Sally, you sit down with each one separately. You explain that you have made a commitment to being a better leader by making clearer the path to mutual success. You point out the issues and say that you're not raising them for disciplinary purposes but for exploring ways in which the gaps can be overcome. You pledge your support and express your willingness to work with them. You use this occasion to remind each of them of the big picture--the ways in which their work affects your association's mission, vision, and goals. For example, government grants and needs-based educational programs are vital to helping members achieve their own goals.

Pleasantly surprised, you discover that by not waiting until you catch them doing something wrong and by tying the issues to the big picture, you have gotten Bill's attention to a greater degree than before. And for the first time, you've had a discussion with Sally about improving educational programs without hitting a wall of defensiveness.

Abraham Lincoln's lesson. Abraham Lincoln said that when he had an important message to convey, he did not like to rely on only one of the recipient's five senses. He connected with two: 1) sense of hearing--the spoken message and 2) sense of sight--a letter or other document.

Following Honest Abe's example, you send short follow-up notes to Bill and Sally to confirm the key points of your recent discussions. With Bill, you confirm that he understands the importance of meeting all grant deadlines in the future, keeping proper records of fundraising efforts, and following up promptly with potential contributors. You also reinforce the steps he intends to take to achieve these goals.

With Sally, you confirm the importance of making sure that the association's training programs meet the needs of the members and highlight the steps Sally intends to take to ensure that this happens. You conclude each written message with the following sentence: "If you have any questions, or if this doesn't accurately summarize our conversation, please let me know immediately."

Subsequently, you find your written summaries useful in a couple of ways: 1) They help you get your point across to your employees about what's really important and what really needs to happen; and 2) when subsequent problems arise, such as actions that are inconsistent with what was discussed, you can refer to these written confirmations of prior discussions to assist in getting back on course. To paraphrase Teddy Roosevelt, the documents become the "big stick" allowing you to "speak softly."

The D-I-S method of communication and praise. In putting your weight forward on the skis when working with employees, you happily discover another, perhaps even more important, use of the D-I-S method. Not only does it apply to confronting problems "directly, immediately, and specifically," but it also means D-I-S'ing employees about the positive things they do that contribute to your association's mission.

You no longer take the good stuff for granted. You praise Pam directly when she does something praiseworthy, such as staying late to help you complete a report for the board or placating an irate member when you were out of town and couldn't respond. One morning, you note that Pam showed initiative in dealing with two different members about when you could speak to each, including prioritizing the sequence of return calls for you to make. Instead of allowing this to pass without comment, you D-I-S her, letting her know directly, immediately, and specifically how what she did contributes to your effectiveness as executive director. Subsequently, you observe that Pam shows even more initiative in helping you with your schedule.

After recovering the lost treasure of employee praise, you decide to take the same approach with others--even Sally and Bill--while making sure your praise is honest. You purchase a colorful battery as a paperweight for your desk. Why? A battery contains two terminals, negative and positive. You decide that you can use the battery as a daily reminder to D-I-S employees on both the negatives and the positives of their work.

Finishing the run

From time to time, you encounter challenging ski conditions in the workplace: emotional eruptions by employees, threatened claims, and disgruntled members. They tempt you to lean back on skis as the instinct to avoid reappears. However, you remember to use the instinct as a trigger to do the opposite and keep your weight firmly forward. Despite occasional bumps, across time weight forward becomes your habitual way to ski and manage.

Jathan Janove is a partner in Janove Baar Associates, L.C., a Salt Lake City-based employment law firm. He is the author of Managing to Stay Out of Court: How to Avoid the Eight Deadly Sins of Mismanagement (2005, SHRM and Berrett-Koehler) and a frequent columnist in HR Magazine. E-mail: [email protected].

RELATED ARTICLE: The Eight Deadly Sins of Mismanagement and the Corresponding Virtues

As an employment lawyer, I have long been intrigued with the question of how employers can swim against the tide of an increasingly litigious, victim-oriented society. Can tough management decisions be made and executed without producing claims?

In working with clients since the 1980s, I've learned that claim prevention does not require rocket science or even great managerial talent. Rather, it requires consistent application of a few basic principles that make it possible to achieve both claim prevention and people leadership. Here's an overview of the management sins I've seen and the corresponding virtues you can use to lead, mentor, and develop employees while keeping the lawyers at bay, taken from my book Managing to Stay Out of Court: How to Avoid the Eight Deadly Sins of Mismanagement (2005, SHRM and Berrett-Koehler).

1. Leaning back on skis versus weight-forward skiing. As described in the main article, it's vital to convert the instinct to avoid into a trigger for doing the opposite--confronting difficult issues, including potential workplace violence and sexual harassment.

2. Dissin' employees versus D-I-S'ing them. The sin of dissin' means failing to be honest about problems and causing brainlock--employee anger so intense that the person cannot move on, psychologically or physically, without striking back. The best means of preventing dishonesty and thus brainlock is called D-I-S. It's a communication technique for giving employees direct, immediate, and specific feedback, orally and in writing, for both praise and correction.

3. Rational lies versus honesty in all things. The key here is to learn to avoid rationalizations--as in performance evaluations that give acceptable ratings for unacceptable performance--and to make sure employees truly know where they stand.

4. Misguided benevolence versus E-R-A. Even when employees face significant personal challenges, such as health problems, it is important for their sake as well as your association's to avoid lowering expectations. Rather, you should maintain expectations, responsibility, and accountability.

5. Inconsistency versus ducks in a row. This sin arises from four inconsistency traps: treating one employee inconsistently with another; treating staff inconsistently with written documents such as the employee handbook; allowing inconsistencies to arise within various personnel documents; and treating employees differently now than you did in the past. Tools to overcome inconsistency include "that was then, this is now"--a clear message for marking big changes that are about to take place in workplace expectations--and "ducks in a row"--pre-emptive steps that cover all the bases before you take significant employee action. Both these tools create a sense of fairness and prevent discrimination claims.

6. Guarding information versus sharing it. To avoid the law of employee speculation--which states that speculation is always worse than reality--disclose information about layoffs and other terminations and create an information-rich culture.

7. I listening versus E-A-R listening. Managers will get better results by avoiding self-centered modes of listening. Instead they should apply techniques such as explore, acknowledge, and respond. (For more on listening skills, see sidebar "Listen More, Talk Less.")

8. Front-of-the-nose perspective versus the big picture. To avoid short-sightedness, managers must step back in order to step forward. This means creating a big picture outline of what really matters in employee performance; forming a star profile of the critical things outstanding employees would actually do; and developing goal-oriented communication with both subordinates and superiors.

RELATED ARTICLE: Listen More, Talk Less

One of the sins of mismanagement that leads to workplace trouble can be called "listening through your /." This sin arises when you let your own perspective or ego dominate important conversations with employees.

Managers often avoid listening because they fear they'll hear unpleasant news, lose authority, or waste time. But when you as an executive fail to invest in your employees by listening to them, both you and they spend more time in a problem-solving mode than a growth or development mode. In addition, poor listening can lead to missed opportunities to prevent claims and increase the likelihood of brainlock--employee anger so intense that the person cannot move on, psychologically or physically, without striking back.

Managers who are poor listeners often fit into these categories:

* The toe-tapper, who thinks that listening means waiting for his or her turn to talk.

* The autobiographer, who translates everything into his or her own experiences and beliefs.

* The cross-examiner, who listens for an employee's mistakes or weaknesses in order to pounce.

The opposite of listening through your / is a corresponding management virtue: "listening through your ears." This does not mean abdicating authority or control; rather, this virtue makes your leadership more effective. You acquire valuable insights and avoid mistaken assumptions. You also reap emotional benefits, which help you effectively manage the feelings aspect of workplace relationships.

The following techniques will help you:

Two-for-one. "God gave you a hint with a gift of one mouth and two ears," the Yiddish saying goes. So for every one statement you make, ask two questions. This simple but highly effective technique uncovers a wealth of insight into employee perceptions and understanding.

The E-A-R or explore, acknowledge, respond. This is described in Ken Blanchard's audio program Personal Excellence. First you explore the employee's views or perspective and acknowledge what the employee has said, then (and only then) do you respond.

The funnel. Picture a funnel. At the top or wide end, you pour in the employee's information using broad, open-ended questions. Next, filter the essence of the communication through the narrow end by asking, "Do I understand you correctly?" Then summarize the employee's key points.

Directive listening. How do you make yourself listen when you must get certain points across but time is limited or you face an employee who's a walking filibuster? Control and even interrupt with questions that lead the employee to the subject, as in "Okay, Pat, now I need to ask you about ..." Of course, you could also direct employees in such situations through statements or commands. But by doing it through questions, you accomplish the same result without being overbearing, and you give the employee a greater sense of participation.

The monk. Before you disagree with someone's position, summarize it and confirm your understanding. Then express your opposing view. Especially useful for handling heated discussions, the monk comes from a rule of discourse used in an ancient European monastery.

The triple two. Ask employees to answer this question: What two things should I a) stop doing, b) continue doing, or c) start doing? This technique stems from a Wall Street Journal article discussing a corporate CEO's method of obtaining a reality check and overcoming his subordinates' reluctance to speak candidly to him.

Although this technique was designed by the corporate "emperor" to ensure that he was wearing clothes, you and your employees can use it at all organizational levels, regardless of reporting relationship. Whether you elicit more or less than two suggestions per question does not matter. You will receive valuable information and reap important emotional benefits by showing a desire to hear the other person's perspective--even when it stings a bit.

Article Details

Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:	Janove, Jathan
Publication:	Association Management
Geographic Code:	1USA
Date:	Jun 1, 2005
Words:	3293
Previous Article:	Refocus, restructure, revitalize: associations offer insights into remaining relevant and responsive in changing environments.
Next Article:	Six degrees of sustainability: collaboration across sectors contributes to organizational and social sustainability while helping preserve the planet.
Topics:	Conflict management Cases Skiers Cases