We wince at the thought, but if you’re a manager you have to tackle tricky staff problems head on. This, inevitably, means the dreaded “little chat”. Simple conflict-management techniques really help - Georgina Harris explains how to reduce the pain but get results
Whether it’s a worker who is endlessly late, an employee with a flamboyant range of minor ailments or the classic idler, you’ll know that some people’s contribution to your team seems to add up to an empty chair, tight-lipped resentment from the others and low-level morale drain. If the problem’s recent, and not serious enough to warrant a disciplinary, you might be tempted to avoid spending precious managerial time sorting it out. But slackers and whingers tend not to fix themselves, and if their behaviour gets worse, you don't have an HR problem, you have a profit problem.
Or legal trouble. In 2007–08, the number of individual employment tribunal claims rose to over 190,000. Acas points out that people are also now more aware of their rights at work, which means if employers do not manage conflict effectively, they could face a court case or, more likely, an expensive settlement. So it’s worth nipping “issues” in the bud.
Start by taking control of what you can: set a time, place and date for a discussion with the employee. Most importantly, set a goal. What result do you need out of this meeting? Keep sight of your aim, before, during and after the meeting.
Plan ahead for the chat by gathering the evidence you need. Jot down examples of the problem behaviour and why it’s causing difficulties. Keeping your aim in sight, make a list of how you and the employee work together to fix the problem.
Once you’re in the meeting, explain to the employee that you are both there to restore harmony. Then ask the employee to put their side of the story. Don’t interrupt.
As they’re talking, practice active listening. Encourage your employee to be open so you can both root out the key issues. Show you understand your employee’s point of view and you are taking in the detail of what they are saying by restating what they said in your own words. That shows your responses are more than lip service, and you should be appreciated for listening.
Don’t assume your staff member can see things from your point of view. Your job might be to check the balance sheets against staff productivity; theirs may not. So, even if it seems (or is) blindingly obvious, make it clear exactly why their behaviour is a problem. Appeal to their self-interest by asking them how they think their behaviour looks to others at work.
If they get emotional, don’t respond in kind or you’ll give your power away. But don’t dismiss the role of feelings entirely; your employee needs to see you respecting and acknowledging how they feel. Getting fiery = bad news; acknowledging feelings = good news.
Avoid getting personal at all costs. While tempting, it won’t help reach your goal any faster and will make you, not your staff member, look like the team’s liability. Focus on the behaviour, not the person.
No matter how exasperating it is, refuse to engage in arguments – keep your mind trained on getting the result you want. If you need more incentive to stay calm, bear in mind it takes two to argue. And whatever comes out of you in anger could end up a bigger problem for you than a slacker team member.
Move on to a range of solutions you can finalise. Use neutral phrases to suggest behaviour changes, such as “Let’s talk about how you might do that”. Don’t say “You can’t keep doing this”, just repeat “You must arrive by 9am”. If the problems are pretty basic – repeated lateness – take them step-by-step through how they will make it in by 9am. Stay non-confrontational; arguing will not get an employee out of bed earlier. Although it’s tiring, keep relentlessly positive – if you’re faced with an endless array of obstacles to improving the performance, work together to solve them. Be patient, but be wary of making concessions you can’t offer everyone.
Once you’ve reached a solution, repeat it clearly so you both understand it. Then arrange a follow-up chat, and leave it at that. Exit the room and breathe – job well done.
Do you work in a civilised environment? Surrounded by an atmosphere of sweetness and light, with cheerful colleagues merrily pulling together to achieve the organisation’s aims? Does everyone share tea-making - and often offer you a biscuit? Thought not.
You’re not alone. Conflict at work is a big problem and there is now a plethora of legislation and procedures designed to prevent it. And as a recent article in the British Medical Journal pointed out, rudeness at work can be a major problem. They cite an incident on board a Northwest Airlines flight last year where the pilot and co-pilot became involved in a heated argument, “lost situational awareness” and overshot the airport by 150 miles. A member of the cabin crew had to bring them back to earth (almost literally).
According to the BMJ, disputes between health staff are commonplace. That worries me more. Aircraft have autopilots and, ahem, cabin crew, to point out when the pilot has lost the plot (or the plane). If the surgeon removing my ingrowing toenail is in a strop, who will stop him from whipping off another part of my anatomy by mistake? The BMJ survey reported that “disagreements” between nurses and surgeons were reported by 63 per cent of respondents.
According to research, being the victim of rudeness can impair your cognitive skills. If someone is rude to you at work or you witness insults being traded you are more likely to make mistakes, says study author Rhona Flin. In most workplaces, the consequences of a loss of concentration might not be so dramatic, but it can still present a problem.
Workplaces have become, on the surface, more informal environments yet the type of conduct that is acceptable is much more restricted. Just think about how we all love “Life on Mars” and “Ashes to Ashes”. Man or woman, who doesn’t secretly want to be Gene Hunt for a day? Try it – you’ll get “grieved” to Kingdom Come. We often see cases where a client complains of unacceptable behaviour, be it sexist, racist, homophobic or just cruel, which is then dismissed by the perpetrator as “banter”, “having a laugh”, with the victim further made miserable by accusations they “can’t take a joke”. It’s not on. So where is the dividing line between what’s acceptable and what’s not? You can’t draw it so easily.
Maybe rudeness at work has had a more dramatic effect. Here in the City, dealing rooms are notorious for being high-pressure, stressed and obnoxious environments. Perhaps if they had all been well behaved and courteous to each other they wouldn’t have caused the biggest recession since the 1930s? Just a thought.