It’s called “management.”

Hair-Splitting Doesn’t Make for Happy Employees
At his excellent Gruntled Employees blog, Jay Shepherd wrote a good post on “Nickel-and-diming your employees.” He lays out an example of a company with pointlessly nitpicky rules about when its traveling salespeople can buy meals on the company tab. Then he appeals for common sense in the writing and application of rules like this. Here’s the kicker:
Employers: resist the urge to have policies like these. Treat your employees like adults. If they spend unreasonable amounts on meals or other expenses, talk to them about it. If it’s a persistent problem with a particular employee who’s taking advantage of the company, fire that employee. But don’t assume that all your employees are trying to bilk the company for an extra airport donut.
Amen. Compliance and cost control are good things, as I remind myself every time I use D&B’s precise-but-fair system for filing expense reports. You don’t want people stepping out of bounds with their expense accounts or anything else. But Shepherd is exactly right here, and to my mind what he’s really calling for is . . . management.
When in Doubt, Write a New Rule? No.
I’ve worked in organizations where the infractions of one person, or a handful, were answered not by individual correction, but by the bureaucratic institution of new rules. Because one person was clueless, or selfish, or whatever, everyone had to jump some new hurdle. And honestly, I’ve never even had it that bad — the horror stories from some of my friends would make you grind your teeth.
By contrast, I’ve also had great managers who took it upon themselves to offer correction at the point of need.
- Somebody’s coming in late and taking too many smoke breaks? Talk to that person and lay out a better schedule for them.
- Somebody’s making reams of photocopies for the Cub Scout pack on company equipment? Create a non-threatening opportunity to talk it over one-on-one, explain why it’s a problem, and set clear expectations for the future.
- Somebody’s demeanor in meetings stifles discussion and wins them enemies? It’s an opportunity for pointed coaching, not aversion.
One of the best conversations I ever had with a manager came many years ago. He laid out my performance, starting with the good things, then pointed out some aspects that were lacking, and made the connection between those aspects and the way bonuses were calculated. Then he said something like, “We love what you’re doing in a lot of ways, but X and Y cost you money this year.” He said it in the tone of a friend offering candid advice to a friend; it was clear he said it because he would rather I did succeed. It was some of the best feedback I ever got.
That’s what managers — or the good ones, anyway — do.
Simple, eh?
~
Photo by Traci Todd, used under a Creative Commons license.
Category: ManagementIf you liked this post, please consider subscribing to the RSS feed so you can receive future articles delivered to your feed reader.
2 Comments so far
Leave A Comment

Tim – you’re on to a major good point, one with which I couldn’t agree more (http://llinlithgow.com/bizzX/2007/07/aholes_shirkers_and_performanc.html)
As usual let me point to Drucker and his book within a book talking about how to manage people (actually two – one on workers per se and the other on managers/knowledge workes) where he addresses these issues in stunning, breakthru fashion IMHO.
Over Memorial Day several of the folks were HR types and none of this would occur to them. That’s NOT a criticism because they are so constrained by the regulatory environment that rule writing is how they protect the companies from lawsuits. I once had to spend six months firing a six-sigma performer (-6sig that is)jumping thru procedural hoops. Six months after that 1/2 that division was gone and a year later the whole was shut down.
[...] morning I got to read this article: It’s called “management” and the referring article on what is management regarding rules creation and problems in a [...]