Actively Disengaged employees can be particularly
challenging for leaders because, even though they may be few in number, they
can have a disproportionately large negative impact on the organization. Their
influence can be especially strong on the Disengaged employees, who are particularly
susceptible to the carping of the Actively Disengaged and are often led into
the Actively Disengaged category themselves. Because of this, organizations are
often advised to do whatever they can to shield the rest of the organization
from the Actively Disengaged – a strategy which calls to mind Yankees manager
Casey Stengel’s quote about handling a baseball team: “I try to keep the players
who hate me away from the ones who aren’t quite sure.”
It can be tempting to treat the Actively Disengaged as
bad seeds with a poor work ethic who need to be isolated and ultimately removed
from the organization. “Coaching” for these employees often takes the form of:
“Shape up or else!” However, rather than writing them off, the YES! Leader
might consider another coaching approach that can create a better outcome for
everyone.
First, the YES! Leader does need to emphasize to the Actively Disengaged employee – in a
clear but nonthreatening way – that behavior that disrupts others’ engagement
is unacceptable and must be modified. But rather than stop there, the YES!
Leader should proceed to ask questions that explore what is getting in the way
of the employee’s engagement. Among the many possible sources of Actively
Disengaging behavior, two in particular stand out:
1) A Sense of “I’m
Not Being Heard!” People today expect to have a voice in important work
issues that affect them. They also want to feel as if their knowledge, ideas,
and perspectives are being fully utilized by their organizations. If they feel
stifled and stymied – if they get the sense that the organization believes in
the old “Deciders decide, designers design, workers work” approach to defining
roles and dividing tasks – then they might well rebel against a culture that
expects them to just salute and carry on.
2) Poor Job Fit.
The management expert W. Edwards Deming once said: “A bad process will beat a
good person every time.” Deming was speaking in the context of process design, but the same idea applies to organizational and job design as well. If a person’s values, skills, and interests
are out of synch with the job she is expected to do, she’s very likely to
become frustrated in her role. Especially if the organization’s culture
discourages creative approaches to letting people do what they do best every
day, then the person may react with vocal resistance to being forced into an
unsuitable role. Rather than being regarded as a good (or even great) person in
an ill-fitting role, the employee might instead be treated as a “bad actor” who
bears full responsibility for her own situation.
By approaching the Actively Disengaged employee with
positive expectations about her motivations, the YES! Leader may learn that the
real problem is not the person but the environment in which she’s being
expected to perform. The leader and
employee can then start working collaboratively toward removing the barriers
blocking the employee’s path to greatness.
REFLECTIONS FOR THE YES! LEADER
If you have an Actively Disengaged employee, consider the
following types of coaching questions that might uncover the barriers to
engagement and help the employee take effective action to deal with them:
·
What is something important you’ve been saying
that nobody is hearing? Why do you think they’re not hearing it? What can I do
to make sure they hear it? What can you
do differently to communicate it more effectively?
·
What have you been telling me that you think I
haven’t been hearing?
·
What is one thing that, if it changed in your
current role, would make you feel more satisfied and productive?
·
If you had a magic wand, what is one thing you
would change about this department, team, or organization?
Naturally, asking these types of questions won’t do any
good unless (1) You open your mind to the possibilities in the employee’s
ideas, and (2) The coaching interaction leads to a joint action plan to start
moving toward change.
No comments:
Post a Comment