Hubert Wood wrote:
> I am aware that the sandwich technique for giving out bad news to employees
> was in vogue for several years but I'm now hearing that employees have been
> conditioned to expecting bad news anytime that a favorable comment is made
> to them and therefore they do not hear the good news because they are
> waiting on the brick to fall on their head. What I'm hearing now is that it
> is better to simply face the employee with the bad news or good news as the
> case may be instead of sending mixed messages as the sandwich technique
> does. Any thoughts on this?
I agree that sending mixed messages can create all sorts of problems
(e.g., people stop hearing the good news). I favor the direct
approach. If the bad news is something that the employee has no
control over, just give them the information. Listening with (honest)
compassion after the news has been delivered may have a much greater
impact on the worker than serving up a "good-news/bad-news sandwich".
(If the compassion is not there, don't fake it. It only makes
matters worse.)
If the bad news addresses something the employee can control
(unfavorable feedback regarding the worker's performance), I
generally present it as useful information rather than bad news per
se. I clarify the demands of the job and indicate as concretely as
possible where the gaps are. This helps to create an atmosphere in
which mistakes are accepted as part of learning. There is no shame
in learning. It is a necessary and desirable process in human
resource management. (This can go a long way in establishing trust
and loyalty.)
However, there are times when the velvet gloves need to come off.
Some workers may view a tolerance for errors as a sign that quality
doesn't matter. This becomes more of a motivational problem than a
learning problem. The harshness of the feedback (i.e., the bad news)
should escalate until the errors (or the loafers) disappear. When
sanctions do come into play, I prefer to simply state the
contingencies in advance and allow the workers to make their own
choices. This matter-of-fact approach always struck me as being
"fair, but firm."
Generally when bad news is involved, non-verbal messages may be as
important than the verbal ones. Cool heads usually prevail. If
the manager can demonstrate grace under pressure, workers are more
likely to maintain their composure as well.
As requested, these are just some thoughts on delivering bad news.
This is clearly an area where communication is more art than science.
Hence, there may never be "a best method." Maybe that is why it
feels so rewarding when a difficult case does turn out well. I would
like to hear what other folks think about communication when there
may be strong emotional reactions involved. It is relevant for
managing workers as well as students.
Charlie.
********************************************
Charles Carroll, Ph.D.
Universitair Docent (Assist. Prof.)
Faculty of Management and Organization
University of Groningen
Landleven 5
Postbus 800
9700 AV Groningen
The Netherlands
Fax: +31 50 363 2174
tel: +31 50 363 3626 / 3839
prive: +31 50 542 0583
e-mail:
c.carroll@bdk.rug.nl