WorkLifeBridge

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the Peter Principle as

the theory that employees within an organization will advance to their highest level of competence and then be promoted to and remain at a level at which they are incompetent.

In the words of its editorial review at Amazon.com, The Peter Principle, written by Dr. Laurence Peter and originally published in 1969, tries to explain why boredom, bungling, and bad management are built into every organization. Dr Peter suggested that employees get rewarded for good work by moving upward until they get promoted into jobs they just can’t do and wind up desperately treading water, driving their colleagues crazy, and dragging down productivity and profit.

HowStuffWorks cites the promotion of Michael Brown to head of FEMA and the resultant Hurricane Katrina debacle as a classic case of the Peter Principle in action. We’ve all seen the Peter Principle and its results many times, at least as embodied by Scott Adams’s Dilbert comic strip and his book The Dilbert Principle. His assertion is that companies tend to systematically promote their least-competent employees to management in order to limit the amount of damage they are capable of doing. Either way, the sad truth is that many people are in management roles for all the wrong reasons.

In all fairness, there are many managers out there doing a great job. These folks may have been promoted into these roles because some astute manager above them recognized their people skills. Conversely, they may have been promoted for the wrong reasons, but once in management, either developed or discovered within themselves the necessary skills to excel in their new roles. Unfortunately, one can also cite numerous examples where people were promoted incorrectly and were not developed into their new responsibilities. As a result they suffered, struggled, stagnated, and caused damage to those around them and to the bottom line.

So why does this happen? First, people want to move their career ahead, and specifically to make higher salaries, and often the only way to do so is to move into management. Second, managers appreciate the work of the people below them and assume that superior technical performance must lead to superior management performance, which is the wrong assumption. Third, most organizations throw new managers into their new responsibilities with little training, mentoring, or other help in developing the skills they need. Finally, when managers do fail, it’s often in little ways that go undetected, and even when they are recognized as sub-par, most organizations have few mechanisms to transfer these folks back to roles where they can be successful.

So what can be done to prevent the Peter Principle from eroding your organization? First, take care when promoting people to do so for the right reasons, and in particular, for their people skills. Second, create avenues for people to advance their careers and incomes without going into management by creating roles that build on their technical excellence. Third, listen to your employees by doing 360 degree assessments to gauge how managers are faring in their new duties. And finally, support your new managers by fostering open communication so they can discuss the challenges they face, and by providing them with the training and coaching they need to become successful.

If a problem is affecting you at work, chances are you bring the problem home with you at the end of the day.

That works in reverse as well. If something is bothering you at home, you bring it to work with you. Problems are like that — we carry them wherever we go.

Since all of us have personal problems that can affect our ability to focus on our work the way we want, from time to time here at WorkLifeBridge we will feature articles with tips on addressing those pressing home-life problems.

Today’s article tackles a timely concern for many people affected by the current housing crisis: “Using Negotiation Skills to Avoid Foreclosure and Other Calamities”

Like many people today, you’re probably wondering how to survive the real estate downturn and the credit crunch. What do you do when your interest rate has gone up and you can no longer afford your payments? What do you do when the bills have piled up and you have to make tough choices on which to defer and which to try and pay?Tough as these questions are, in principle, they mirror many of the decisions you have to make at work. You’ve made commitments to a customer and are having trouble meeting them. You’re managing a project that is behind schedule and has run into technical difficulties. Your suppliers are hounding you for payments but you have a receivables problem and don’t have the cash…

It’s all the same stuff, the gist of which is that you’ve made commitments, financial or otherwise, that you can no longer sustain. You have two choices - one choice, which a lot of people make, is to try harder, cutting corners, exhausting themselves, and eventually failing anyway. The other choice is to communicate and negotiate, and in the process turn your adversaries into your partners in solving the problem.

A little known fact is that most banks and other creditors would rather get something than nothing. If a bank forecloses on your house, it often loses a lot of money on the sale of the property, and besides, most banks prefer to be in the money business rather than the real estate business. Similarly, if your business creditors bankrupt you, they are often so far down the line on the list of creditors and the bankruptcy process itself takes so long, that they will see only a few pennies of the dollar you owe them.

So your best strategy when you can’t meet your commitments is to communicate with the other party as early as possible and try to set up a meeting to talk. This is true whether this party is a bank or a supplier or a customer. People would generally prefer to know as early as they can if there is trouble down the road. Be clear in your statement of the problem and have some solutions in your mind to discuss with them. Finally, regard the situation as a collaborative negotiation whose goal is to solve the problem to best meet everyone’s interests and view the other party as your partner in making this happen.

Be clear about what you can and can’t do, and be conservative in any new commitments you make so you don’t have to have this same conversation with them over and over again. Try to use objective data to persuade the other party that your limits are real, and at the same time, be open to their concerns regarding your commitments. Pay close attention to what they have to say and make sure you understand them. Listen for clues as to what they need in order to keep working with you on renegotiating a deal that works for both of you.

Keep in mind that the bank, your creditors, and your customers, have a vested interest in your success, because part of their success depends on your success. Besides, most people can relate to someone going through a tough time. Thus, if you communicate often and clearly, and if you make the people you committed to part of the solution, you will be able in many cases to negotiate enough breathing room to get back on your feet.

There are lots of ways to make decisions within an organization.

Some managers prefer to make decisions unilaterally, based on their own thinking and knowledge, and to dictate the results of those decisions to those working for them. Others like to make no decisions at all, delegating all decisions to others in their place. Some gather lots of information from everyone on their team and take the advice of their team in making their decisions. Others still try to get everyone to agree, valuing the buy-in and ownership that comes from consensus decision-making.

Some companies and organizations purport to value consensus decision-making so highly that they make it a core value and develop a culture of consensus that pervades the company. The resultant organization strives for harmony and involvement, making sure that everyone who wants to has a say in every decision and and that no one feels like decisions have been imposed upon them or dictated to them. By making sure that everyone in the organization is on board with every decision, these organizations strive for maximum buy-in from all involved, wholehearted implementation of the decisions, and reduced conflict in the organization.

The problem is that consensus might not always be the best way to make decisions, and that consensus decision-making can have drawbacks and pathologies that undermine the very purposes it looks to achieve. For one, not every decision concerns every person in the organization. In some cases, some people may have neither information relating to the matter at hand nor will be particularly affected by the results of any decision made. Requiring consensus draws these people into the decision-making process needlessly while potentially taking them away from areas where their skills are put to better use. In addition, consensus tends to be a slow process, and some decisions need to be made quickly.

Moreover, a culture of consensus can in reality be a mask for organizational ills such as rampant conflict avoidance or an inability to commit to decisions. Many people are uncomfortable with conflict and look to either avoid conversations that lead to conflict or to suppress conflict if it ever erupts. On an organizational scale, conflict avoidance can prevent people from having genuine discussions regarding their disagreements and diminish the richness of ideas that comes from heated debate. In addition, an unease around making decisions and commitments can lead to endless analysis and conversation in which nothing gets done. As a result, instead of consensus leading to good decisions and buy-in, it might lead to sub-optimal decisions, paralysis, and alienation.

Consensus decision-making can be wonderful, so long as you’ve chosen to use it purposefully and for valid reasons, and so long as you are using it under the right circumstances and with the involvement of the right people. It is also a difficult process to manage and must be tended to skillfully and diligently in order to be effective at achieving the results you want.

Here are some resources and ideas to help you get the most out of your consensus decision-making process:

• Here are some step-by-step instructions for achieving consensus
• For a more detailed treatment, here is a handbook on consensus processes
• For an even more elaborate discussion, here are notes on consensus
• Finally, here is a Cornell University study on when managers should and shouldn’t use consensus

The latest edition of Complete Lawyer, an online publication on professional development, quality of life, and career issues that impact lawyers, covers an issue that any workplace — legal or otherwise — needs to pay attention to:  workplace bullying.

Why?  Because of the consequences it holds for workforce retention, productivity, company reputation, and employer liability.

“No Jerks Allowed!” features articles from workplace experts, including:

• “Yes, There Are Ways To Reform Workplace Jerks” by Allison West
• “Create A Blueprint For A ‘Bullying-Free’ Workplace” by Gary Namie
• “How To Spot And Deal With Jerks” by Julie Fleming-Brown
• “Power Breeds Nastiness” by Robert Sutton

What is your workplace doing to address workplace bullying?

In a recent poll by ComPsych, a provider of employee assistance programs (EAPs) and other workplace services, 60 percent of employees indicated that they have high levels of stress, manifested by extreme fatigue and a feeling of being out of control. Moreover, 42 percent said that they lose at least one hour or more per day in productivity due to stress, and 35 percent said that they lose 15 - 30 minutes per day. That’s a lot of productivity loss.

Put simply, if you run a company of 100 people, you’re losing about 46 hours of productivity from your employees due to stress every day.

How is productivity affected? For one, stress increases absenteeism. The same survey revealed that nearly half of employees don’t show up for work one or two days a year just due to stress, and another 30 percent miss three to six days for the same reasons. In addition, even when they do come to work, over half the survey participants indicated that they show up too stressed to be effective at their jobs one to four days a year, and another 20 percent put that figure at five days or more. Nearly two thirds of employees take frequent stress breaks to talk about issues with colleagues, and 83 percent come to work when they’re sick.

The scary thing is that most managers are unaware of the stress that their employees are feeling and may be ill-prepared to address it. Of the human resources managers surveyed, only 45 percent thought employees had a high level of stress. Moreover, over a third of employees surveyed cited people issues as their primary cause of stress, and 40 percent of those asked cited stress and personal relationship issues as a primary cause of absences.

Your employees’ stress is costing your company in productivity, and that translates to reduced profitability.

So what can you do about it? Forbes has an article on stress in the workplace, including a slide show of the ten best workplace stress relievers. Top among their tips were ideas such as physical exercise, fun and humor, building in slack to account for unexpected glitches, and simply bringing a healthy perspective when mishaps occur.

The Work Bloom Blog also has additional excellent suggestions for employees on dealing with stress in the work place. Companies that provide their employees with encouragement and opportunities to use these stress-relieving suggestions are doing both their employees and their bottom line a favor.

But since people issues are at the root of a great deal of stress, and since stress prevention is preferable to stress management, enhancing your employees’ people skills and increasing your company’s conflict management competence can have a profound effect on the stress that your employees are feeling. If the statistics in the ComPsych survey bear out, by helping people understand their own behaviors and deal better with those around them, you can reduce their stress level, improve morale, reduce absenteeism, increase productivity, and ultimately, be more profitable.

Here are some steps you can take:

• Make EAP and other referral services available for your employees to help them deal with life stresses external to the company.
• Provide training in negotiation, conflict resolution, communication, and other people skills to your employees, and particularly to your managers.
• Create both formal and informal dispute resolution processes and systems for your organization, and let people know how to access them.
• Treat employee complaints and behaviors seriously with respect. Make it safe for people to talk, and take effective action when warranted.

Managers love to review the star employees in their organizations, especially in good times when they can afford to reward them in every way. You call the person into your office, greet them with a broad smile, lavish praise and congratulations on them, and hand them generous raises and bonuses.

The problem is that there are only so many stars in any organizations, and often the rewards you can give even your stars fall far short of what you would like to give them or what you think they deserve.

As a result, many managers delay, postpone, and avoid performance reviews any way they can. According to a recent BusinessWeek survey, more than 70% of managers admit they have a hard time giving reviews to under-performing employees. It’s not unusual for employees to complain that their managers are months and sometimes more behind in performance reviews, and often the employees themselves are too unsure of themselves or worried about their relationship with the boss to bring it up. But don’t kid yourself, they are thinking about it.

In addition, many managers, when faced with under-performing employees, can’t bring themselves to give bad reviews, and as a consequence give bland, watered-down reviews that lead employees into thinking everything is going fine. As a result, employees have no sense of where they need to improve their performance, and often communication starts to deteriorate between the employees and their managers. Ultimately, with nothing negative in the under-performing employee’s file, organizations can find themselves sued for discrimination or wrongful dismissal if they ever need to let these employees go.

Thus, whether you are the bearer of happy tidings or bad news, it is crucial to be as straightforward and accurate in performance reviews as you can be, and to face your employees in a constructive, timely, and matter-of-fact manner. Remember that your goal is both to evaluate and guide them, and in the process to advance the interests of your employees, your team, and your entire organization. Here are a few suggestions to make the process more productive:

1. Hold the performance reviews on time - they are part of your commitment to your employees.
2. Have the employees complete an assessment of their own work ahead of time and start the review process by hearing from them. They might already be aware of their shortcomings, which will make your job easier. If they are not, you will know at the outset what perceptions you are dealing with.
3. Don’t argue with your employees’ perceptions. Listen to them and make sure you’ve understood them and acknowledged them.
4. Present your assessment of their performance in terms of your observations of their work rather than the conclusions you’ve derived from those observations. Describe what you see in simple, straightforward terms, as much on a factual level as you can.
5. Expect an emotional response to your factual statements - after all, your review is likely to touch on sensitive ground regarding how your employees feel about yourself and your work. Be prepared to acknowledge the feelings that your employees express without backing down from your factual assessment.
6. Focus the discussion on their goals and interests as well as the expectations that you have in order to create a constructive conversation that looks forward to their future performance rather than just discusses the past.

This is the time of year when many organizations hold company parties, providing important opportunities for people to network and get to know each other in a more informal setting. People from different departments and management levels get to rub elbows socially, with the goal of breaking down some barriers and building morale. Unfortunately, as the evening wears on and the alcohol flows, people sometimes forget that while the party conveys a different atmosphere than the office, they are still with people from their place of work, and that there are consequences to things they say and do at the party.

Of course, the best way to avoid those consequences is to behave yourself during the party. As an article on the Quintessential Careers web site points out, office parties can both advance and cripple your career. After all, where else but the office party can you find the CEO and the mail room clerk bellied up to the bar together, as a recent Monster.com advice column reminds us. This creates opportunities for friendly conversation but also the danger of unfiltered commentary, since consumption of alcohol is acceptable at roughly 70% of holiday office parties.

Since your behavior at an office party can help or kill your career, you definitely don’t want to be the person who got so drunk at the office party that they groped a co-worker, told off the boss, or passed out under the buffet table, since on Monday morning you still have to try to work with those people. And chances are you want to avoid having to write a letter of apology (or of resignation), the week after, as discussed in this NPR Morning Edition commentary.

But sometimes despite what you know you should be doing and the advice of many sages, you still do things you regret later. You might have said things you shouldn’t have said to the wrong people, you might have acted like a fool, or done something very inappropriate. Now it’s Monday morning, and you have to salvage your career. Damage may already have been done, but it’s your behavior on Monday and beyond that can determine whether the damage is fleeting or will kill your career at the company.

My first advice is to not go it alone: seek advice from people you trust within the company who might be able to paint a more accurate picture for you about what exactly happened and who else was involved. Things might not be as embarrassing as your remember them to be, or they might be worse, and have a couple of other perspectives on the matter can be helpful. Then you need to decide whether the event will blow over on its own or needs to be addressed. In some corporate cultures, it may be better to leave things unsaid, whereas in others you might need to bring the matter up explicitly.

If you do need to bring it up, figure out who you have to talk to and how public or private to make your communication. This will largely depend on the nature of what you have done and the circumstances surrounding it. When you do communicate, first listen to what people are saying so you know what their concerns are and what you need to address. It’s also important to encapsulate the event by framing it as an unusual, one-time occurrence that is less representative of you as a person and more of the particular circumstances of the moment. People may not be quick to forget, but they do recognize your humanity and are likely to forgive your transgressions, so long as you take appropriate responsibility for your actions and carry yourself with respect for yourself and for others going forward.

For additional thoughts on surviving the holiday office party, check out the following articles:

• “How to Survive Your Office Holiday Party” posted at ClubPlanet.com
• “Annual Holiday Party Hangover Checklist” at FYI: Central Ohio Employment Law Update
• Part II - Employer Liability at Office Holiday Parties - Beyond Sexual Harassment via Connecticut Employment Law Blog

In the meantime, happy holidays!

From time to time, we’ll be rounding up the latest workplace-related stories for your reading pleasure. Here are today’s recommendations:

PhysOrg.com reports on a recent study that examines the influence of beauty, status and sex on job negotiations in “Hiring practices are influenced by beauty“.

Small Business Trends asks the provocative question, “Are Your Employees’ Hours Quality Time or Quantity Time?” How might you answer that about your own workplace?

George’s Employment Blawg takes a look at a harsh realization: “Much Employee Creativity Unused on Job“.

Online Guide to Mediation, a blog published by OptionBridge partner Diane Levin, looks at a new social networking web site that helps employees join forces to effect workplace change, among other things.

PersonnelToday.com lists the “Top 10 management issues companies get wrong“.

Finally, Life at Work, a New Zealand blog that takes an irreverent look at workplace issues from the perspective of an employment lawyer, asks, “Exactly why did you leave your last job?“

For many people, asking for raises at work is very difficult. Many people simply don’t ask, hoping that their efforts will be noticed on their own, and as a result, they can find themselves grossly underpaid. As the Evil HR Lady points out, no one cares as much about your career as you do, and it is up to you to take the initiative regarding your compensation.

So why is money so hard to talk about? For one, many people have been brought up to think that asking for more is unbecoming or rude. This is especially true for women, according to Women Don’t Ask, a book that explores negotiation and the gender divide, and, as a result, women on average earn less and advance their careers more slowly than the men around them.

Many people are also concerned about appearing greedy or damaging the relationship with their manager. The fear of rejection also looms big, since their self esteem is on the line. Managers also make this discussion difficult through their own discomfort with the subject. At the root of much of this mutual discomfort is a perception that this discussion is adversarial — a win-lose scenario in which one’s gain is the other’s loss.

While there is some truth there, in that the pool of available money is limited, both the company and the employee have far more complex interests other than just the money, and by focusing on those greater interests, it is possible to have a collaborative discussion about compensation.

In addition to greater financial rewards, employees want appreciation, career advancement, challenging responsibilities, learning opportunities, and autonomy. Employers want to retain and develop employees, and want people to take initiative and mentor others.

By enlarging the discussion beyond just the money, but not ignoring it either, it is possible to engage in a mutually beneficial conversation that nets the employee a higher salary while providing the company with a happier, more productive, and more capable worker.

Here are three basic things you can do to help create a collaborative approach:

1. Prepare extensively for your negotiation.  Make sure you understand your own interests as well as those of your boss, and think about much more than just the money. Research objective standards you can apply to convince the other person, and think up at least a couple of different options that would make you happy. Research and understand your alternatives to a negotiated agreement. This way you will neither say something foolish out of fear or confusion, and your confidence in your negotiation will improve.
2. Listen more than you talk. Ask your boss open-ended questions and listen to the responses you get as you try to identify interests.
3. Negotiate the relationship concurrently with the outcome. You can’t afford a short-term win that will damage the relationship going forward. The key here is to be respectful, and to really understand where the other person is coming from.

A 2006 book, The Female Brain, made the controversial claim that women speak almost three times as many words per day as men. Despite the fact that linguists swiftly debunked this claim, it and other gender myths persist.

A recent article from the New York Times, “The Feminine Critique“, examines the pervasive nature of gender stereotyping, which can affect our ability to accurately perceive men and women on issues that range from the expression of anger to salary negotiations — any of which can hold serious consequences for the workplace.

Says one researcher, “Most of what we learn shows that the problem is with the perception, not with the woman,” he said, “and that it is not the problem of an individual, it’s a problem of a corporation.”

The good news is that while we may be susceptible to stereotypes, we can overcome them, as we discussed here in October. But it requires a commitment and a willingness to face them. And you can begin by asking, what is your organization doing to counter stereotypes?