I’m often asked to help leaders motivate employees because productivity, quality, attitudes and morale are low.  Leaders typically assume that unhappy employees are the problem, and making them happier – with team-building, money, perks or more involvement in decision-making - is the solution. That might seem like good sense but the answer doesn’t lie in accommodation, appeasement or consensus involving the most demanding employees.

To read the rest of this article from the East Bay Business Times, see: You can't make all employees happy -- and shouldn't try http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2004/08/16/smallb6.html

The key isn’t being nicer; the key is leaders leading and followers following.

It’s true that many employees and managers will be more productive when they are treated the way they want.  But it’s equally true that many will enjoy their jobs only if they don’t have to be productive or evaluated honestly.  These people want to control every decision, put their feelings before work, be catered to and applauded for throwing temper tantrums.

Some examples of different leaders who got into trouble trying to be too nice.  For details, see the original article.

  • The staff in one division of a company was unable to form three-person customer service teams because only 15 of 17 people wanted them.
  • At another company, workers were allowed to interrupt senior leader meetings, rudely challenge any decision and make personal attacks on leaders.
  • In an under-performing unit of a third company, a new supervisor evaluating a resistant and mediocre employee saw a five-year history of excellent reviews.

Lack of appropriate leadership at these companies created power vacuums that attracted negative, critical, unhappy and abusive people who wanted control.  Well-meaning leaders had perpetuated the lie that the best way to encourage employee productivity and professional growth was to placate them through sympathy, begging, bribery and allowing them to act out.  These cultures were self-described as “employee centered, caring, consensus and win-win.”

A key initial step in solving the problems was seeing them as cultures of entitlement, appeasement and rule by petulant, demanding “children.”

The workplace is not a therapeutic environment.  Companies do not exist to make us comfortable and happy, or give unconditional approval.  If your feelings are hurt by honest, professional evaluations, prepare for disappointment.  If they’re hurt by differences in responsibility and authority between leaders and followers, become a leader.

We don’t get to vote on everything.  We can’t force everyone to treat us the way we want.  We get rewarded for productivity and success.  We often have to suck it up and be productive when we’d rather not.

Ultimately, companies are in business to make a profit.  Well-meaning leaders who work too hard at being nice, caring people can find themselves carrying 100 percent of the burden to please the most hostile, demanding employees who aren’t contributing to the success of the organization.

Consensus leadership and flat hierarchies are fads that are finally beginning to pass.  They are simply not efficient or effective enough to succeed.

Leaders lead by determining direction, establishing goals and expectations, and judging employees by performance.  Leaders don’t have to be bullies or ogres.  Of course, listening to employees can be a great asset.  But, in the end, leaders are responsible for leading the way so employees can follow.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

Marie couldn’t run a productive meeting.  Even after leadership training to fix the problem, her teams’ meetings lost focus, ran way over their scheduled times and repeatedly became time-wasters. She couldn’t see why she had these problems.  She’d prepared ahead, the meetings had agendas, she solicited input and she always sought consensus.  So what was wrong?

The reason was clear to an outside observer.  She had saboteurs on each of her two teams and she didn’t know how to deal with them.  Their negativity was destroying morale, teamwork and productivity.

To read the rest of this article from the Philadelphia Business Journal, see: Beware meeting saboteurs who can derail effectiveness http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2009/05/25/smallb3.html

Toxic, manipulative, meeting saboteurs steal everyone’s time, prevent industrious co-workers from meeting their deadlines and increase frustration and tension in the office.  They’re negative, control-freaksBecause of these saboteurs, many coworkers dread coming to work.  Conflict-avoidant managers and coworkers create space for these bullies to flourish.

Marie agreed with my diagnoses, but didn’t know what she could do to stop the sneaky, manipulative bullying.  She didn’t want to be an autocratic, know-it-all manager and unilaterally make decisions.  So, she always scheduled additional meetings at which she hoped the teams could reach consensus and move ahead.

Also she couldn’t imagine how to change the bullies’ attitudes and abuse legally.  She had already dropped hints to both of them, but they hadn’t altered their behavior.

Neither Larry nor Harry thought of himself as a bully or a saboteur, but these terms crystallized Marie’s resolve to stop their behavior, no matter what it took.  She shifted from feeling helpless to being angry and determined.

Then we developed an effective plan that fit the culture of her company.

Learn what you can do to eliminate the high cost of their low attitudes.

All tactics are situational.  Expert coaching and consulting can help you create and implement a plan that fits you and your organization.