Dear List,
I would like to add my $.02 worth to the discussion on giving bad
news.
Running the risk of coming off as a Dilbert cartoon, here goes:
First of all...what is the mind set that giving performance
feedback is bad news? To me giving someone who works for me 'bad
news' says that I am looking at the situation as a 'right' or
'wrong' and placing the entire blame on the empoyee or student
without considering my role as their supervisor, manager or
teacher and shirking my responsibility of communicating clearly,
giving solid direction, and reviewing plans for the performance
before the actual behavior takes place.
I should be looking at every process and performance as an
opportunity for improvement. I shouldn't save my performance
feedback until the final hour. I give and ask for positive and
constructive feedback for EVERYTHING on a CONTINUOUS basis.
I think that when the focus of the feedback is on the person
himself and after the fact and not the process that he chose, then
we are setting up this relationship to be demoralizing,
humiliating and non-productive. Sandwich this between good news,
bad news, no news or a pastry, makes no difference to me.
Are we assuming that people are working from defective genes and
chromosomes and somehow we must point out their personal flaws and
this will yield an improvement in performance? Or are they using
or not using a process that will yeild the results that we are
looking for?
I would recommend that we make clear the outcome that we expect
from the performance -if we are the customer of whatever their
performance will yeild- or do the necessary research to find out
what the customer wants- if we are not the customer.
For example, I would think that it would be my responsibility to
clearly state for the student or employee my expectations, i.e. I
expect assignments to be handed in on time. I expect spelling to
be correct. I expect all data to be researched and referenced.
I would then expect the student or employee to ask questions to
get feedback. I would struggle to make certain that I focussed on
what "results" I am looking for and not what "process" the person
should use, otherwise I might as well do it myself, not to mention
that I reduce the ownership, development, creativity, morale,
pride and buy-in from that person. Not to mention that I never
assist them in their development.
I would also expect to review the process that the person
designed, depending on how critical the performance expectation
is. I might tell them that I want to reduce by 50% the number of
errors made in filling customer orders by June 1, 1997. I would
ask them to determine what process they will use to accomplish
this task, who else should be involved in this process and what
measurables they intend to monitor for results. Later, I would
review the process with them and offer suggestions or opinions
based on my own experience or expectations. I would expect them
to report on a pre-agreed time basis the results of the key
measurables that they are using. Should I notice a trend in the
wrong direction, I would ask them and those involved in the
process to determine a corrective action to get the process moving
in the right direction. All of this would be umbrellaed under a
time line with specific steps and accountability.
Should the results not be what was expected, I would focus on the
process design. Even something as simple as someone being late
for work on a regular basis, requires a look at the process that
they use. The employee might state that they are late because
their sister does not call them on time in the morning to wake
them. I would ask them to look at that process and determine a
correction, which might involve purchasing an alarm clock.
My general opinion is that we as managers or teachers spend way
too much time telling people 'how' to do their jobs or 'how' to
think and not nearly enough time on clarifying what 'results' we
are looking for. All too often the person performing the task or
assignment has no ownership, little understanding, and no clue how
the project fits into the whole picture. The success of them as
individuals hinges on that final result, which we as managers
seldom review or monitor until the final hour. Then we are mad
that we didn't get the results that we expected and somehow this
person submitting the project is a moron with no ambition,
intelligence or character.
Seldom do people perform in a vaccuum. Everyone's performance
depends on the entire system. It would be silly to demand that
the earth reverse her revolution without considering the entire
'law' of the solar system. My own individual performance depends
on how clearly stated the expectations where, the integrity of the
design of my process, the support of those with the power and
money, the clarity of the importance (priority) of the project,
the completion of hand-offs from others involved in my process and
how well I determined possible failures.
Everthing that I am successful at doing today, came from the
helpful feedback that I got from the data that I used, the
Customer's evaluation, and my bosses refusal to place the blame on
me as an individual...forcing me to focus on processes and develop
my skills. Process = Results. I don't like the results...change
the process!
I once had a performance review where my boss asked me to tell her
what my strengths and weaknesses were. When I came to her with
only my strengths, she questioned me. I told her that my
strengths were unlimited and that my weaknesses were strengths
too. They were opportunities for me to improve my processes and
become more valuable to the organization than on the day they
hired me. I use different abilities everytime I design a process.
If I monitor my measurables and make corrections to my process,
there are no weaknesses. The only weakness would be if I didn't
learn from what didn't work in my processes. I cautioned her that
she should actually be more 'weary' of what I call my strengths,
because these are area's where I am least likely to be open minded
and most likely to use without consideration. These are the areas
where I am rigid, and rigidity is often the basis of failure. For
example, I consider myself to be very organized...strength or
weakness? In project planning it is often a strength..in a
brainstorming process it holds me back from really exploring the
edge, which is where I often need to be. So my answer? "My
strengths are my weaknesses (paradigms)...that is why I gave you a
list of strengths. How about we focus on my processes and I will
grow over time by monitoring my results? I will increase my value
to the Corporation and hopefully, you will inrease my pay to
compensate." I challenge all of you to this: State the strength
of your organization, boss, spouse, or self and ask..is this not
also that person or facilities GREATEST weakness?
In an interview for a Quality Manager position, someone once asked
me why I would be looking to fill the Quality Manager position
with a Bachelors degree in Dramatic Arts? My response: "I was 17
when I went to college. Would you trust a 17 year old to design
your life long process based on his experience and understanding
of the needs of a middle aged man with a wife and two kids?" I
got the job.
Thanks for the ear(s),
Rick Corcoran
Continuous Improvement Manager
Mark I
Excel Systems, Inc.
INTERNET:"corcoranre@excelinc.com"