Imagine this, you are a supervisor and have been asked to deliver an ultimatum to an employee (one who has been with you for two years) that has not only been performing poorly, but has become confrontational in the workplace, creating a hostile work environment. You must let them know they must change their ways, or say good bye...how would you approach this situation?
In life, we are surrounded by opportunities for potential conflict, in our personal lives, as well as in the workplace. In the business world it is vital that we approach a situation of conflict by being direct, professional, and focused. Any situation that involves a confrontation in can be uncomfortable and difficult to manage in even the best situation, so it is vital that we are organized, calm, and above all else, tactful in our efforts to address the situation. In the case study presented, it is of the utmost importance that the issues that have been raised be addressed immediately. The employee (we will call him “John”) is well outside of the learning curve within his position, having been with the company for two years. John should, at this point, not only be a valued resource but a trusted member of the staff. Since concerns have been raised not only by his coworkers, but by customers as well, it has crossed a significant line. His performance has begun to impact client relationships as well as employee productivity and work environment.
The first step would be to confront John directly. It is best, in situations such as this, that there not be an audience. Out of respect for the staff, as well as the employee in question, I would request a one-on-one meeting. In our meeting, I would approach him with respect and tact, while remaining direct. I would let him know that because he has been a valued member of the staff for two years, I wanted to make sure to address some issues that have been brought to my attention with him directly. I would let him know that there have been some concerns voiced regarding his recent performance and overall attitude from both coworkers and clients, and I wanted to give him an opportunity to explain. I would ask that he allow me to speak, without interrupting, and then I would do him the courtesy of allowing him to do the same. I have found that offering up specifics is the most effective way to address these types of performance issues. So, I would state specific examples of issues raised by customers, as well as occasions of inappropriate decorum I have noticed myself. This avoids dragging any of his coworkers in, and diverting his frustration to his cohorts. It will also reserve any initial temptations for retaliation he might feel. Throughout my conversation with John, it would be important to remember to address his behaviors, rather than him, personally.
Most likely, his initial reaction would be to get defensive. However, I would remind him that this meeting was not meant to be an attack on him, but an effort to correct some negative behaviors I have seen as of late; that if we did not value him, we would simply let him go, rather than giving him an opportunity to make improvements in his performance. I would also mention to him that in the past, I have seen great things from him, and believe in what he is capable of. So, I cannot help but wonder if he has something else going on that has affected his attitude and performance.
Once I have finished raising the issues at hand, I would ask if he had any questions, and let him know that he was free to speak. However, I would remind him to remain compliant and regard the laws of mutual respect and professionalism. At this time, I would give John time to express himself, assuring that as long as he remained focused on the issues at hand, and respectful in his tone, I would not interrupt. He would surely want to know who had complained, but I would remind him that this was not the focus of the meeting, and that he would be better served by concentrating on things he could do to make positive changes, rather than who blew the whistle. Avoid blame, while at the same time, focusing on responsibility.
Lastly, I would make an action item list with John, establishing a plan of action for how he plans to improve his performance, and his overall attitude in the workplace. I would allow John to brainstorm ideas, ask questions, and offer advice. Then, when we had agreed upon a reasonable course of action, and established a time line for when this plan should take affect, I would assure him that I would hold him accountable to his commitments. Should he stray from the new path of improvement, the consequences would be swift and without negotiation.
By being direct with John, I have avoided potential mis-communication, established a proper channel of accountability, and set the expectations for his future performance. Furthermore, by asking him to take an active role in setting those goals, I have increased his buy-in, as well as his responsibility for ensuring those goals are met. He would understand that his current performance is not acceptable, and will no longer be tolerated, but more importantly, will have a clear understanding of what will be expected of him from that point on. Then, if he should fall short of those guidelines, he would have no one to blame but himself.
While this particular example relates to the business world, the principles translate across several avenues. Be direct, be specific, be proactive, and attack the problem, not the person. Then, establish a plan, set expectations, and hold the person accountable. This holds true to conflicts in the workplace, or with your ten year old when he gets an F on his Social Studies test...think about that, and do some research to help you identify your top conflict resolution strategy. Find your strengths and stick to them.
